View Full Version : Sarah Palin's Complete Tea Party Address: The People vs. The Powerful
HowardCohodas
02-07-2010, 02:16
Sarah Palin's Complete Tea Party Address: The People vs. The Powerful (http://www.pjtv.com/v/3031)
HowardCohodas
02-07-2010, 10:06
I think Sarah Palin's interview with Chris Wallas, which was taped before her Tea Party speech but broadcast this morning, was more impressive and perhaps more important than the keynote speech. She not only held her own with the aggressive, but mostly fair Chris Wallace, but in some ways she was able to control the exchange with Wallace. An accomplishment not in my memory from any other politician from either party. This could be because most other politicians engaging in an interview with Wallace are in the middle of an active battle and are highly guarded. Or it could be that Palin is much more competent in this setting that anyone, including me, gave her credit for. Or it could be both.
May you live in interesting times
Although in principle I supported (past tense) “The Tea Party”, I confess at that time, to very limited knowledge of their platform, thinking in my ignorance that the movement’s base comprised a mix of like minded anti-tax and limit big government people, and it does is some respects. However, as I watched, I’ve come to the conclusion that even with all the press coverage, it is really a fringe element and unconventional due to the movements position, which the CEO of the organization detail in his remarks, as group’s agenda. In doing so, I noticed my agitation increasing to disgust, as it became abundantly clear he believes his mission is ordained, when the CEO began invoking divine right/light as guidance and bible passage as confirmation; I stopped watching, but I am still disturbed. As it appears that with ever increasing frequency we are encountering groups/movements whose premises are predestine and validated religiously.
Utah Bob
02-07-2010, 11:22
Although in principle I supported (past tense) “The Tea Party”, I confess at that time, to very limited knowledge of their platform, thinking in my ignorance that the movement’s base comprised a mix of like minded anti-tax and limit big government people, and it does is some respects. However, as I watched, I’ve come to the conclusion that even with all the press coverage, it is really a fringe element and unconventional due to the movements position, which the CEO of the organization detail in his remarks, as group’s agenda. In doing so, I noticed my agitation increasing to disgust, as it became abundantly clear he believes his mission is ordained, when the CEO began invoking divine right/light as guidance and bible passage as confirmation; I stopped watching, but I am still disturbed. As it appears that with ever increasing frequency we are encountering groups/movements whose premises are predestine and validated religiously.
That was my reaction as well. Looks like a potentially good movement has been hijacked.
Peregrino
02-07-2010, 11:25
Although in principle I supported (past tense) “The Tea Party”, I confess at that time, to very limited knowledge of their platform, thinking in my ignorance that the movement’s base comprised a mix of like minded anti-tax and limit big government people, and it does is some respects. However, as I watched, I’ve come to the conclusion that even with all the press coverage, it is really a fringe element and unconventional due to the movements position, which the CEO of the organization detail in his remarks, as group’s agenda. In doing so, I noticed my agitation increasing to disgust, as it became abundantly clear he believes his mission is ordained, when the CEO began invoking divine right/light as guidance and bible passage as confirmation; I stopped watching, but I am still disturbed. As it appears that with ever increasing frequency we are encountering groups/movements whose premises are predestine and validated religiously.
You are about to be defeated in detail by the progressives (see - they've already won one skirmish by getting themselves labeled "progressive" - i.e. forward thinking/looking, good of all, etc.). What have you won by insisting on idealogical purity/everybody meet my litmus test? Try borrowing a page from our adversary: Form a coalition of groups with similar goals, use them, and discard (or coopt) them when the mission is accomplished. Anybody ever hear the phrase: "Politics makes for strange bedfellows"? Our (my) objective is a constitutional republic with a limited central government that promotes freedom and responsibility. I'm willing to "get in bed" with almost anybody having similar goals. Right now, that's a whole lot less dangerous than OSS agents getting partisans to work together against a common enemy. If the Allies can use the Sicilian Mafia during WWII, why are we holding our noses about working with the "mission from god" fringe? Remember the Religious Right and 1994? Haven't heard much about them lately, have you? (P.S. - the left still goes out of their way to villify/marginalize them, thus denying us an opportunity to leverage conservative christians for fear of being painted with the "lunatic fringe" brush. Would they still be beating that dead horse if they weren't afraid of it?)
Perfection is always the enemy of "good enough". Win the war - then start the purges (if that's the way you feel). It works for the "progressives". They are more than willing to build a coalition to achieve their goals; once that is done they promptly purge the party of "undesireables" and start the cycle all over again.
Food for Thought - Get pragmatic and win or become a footnote in one of Sigaba's books.
HowardCohodas
02-07-2010, 11:50
That was my reaction as well. Looks like a potentially good movement has been hijacked.
To characterize the CEO's remarks as representing either the totality or even the preponderance of attitudes of the "movement" is to characterize Obama in like fashion to the Democrat Party. Both are foreign bodies likely to be rejected. Hopefully before killing their hosts.
At this point the real brilliance of the movement is that it is leaderless. It is organic and visceral. It will reject some ideas promoted at the convention and will embrace some not yet surfaced. It's energy is palpable and undeniable and has created a great fear response from progressives. At the moment, they fear it and that's good enough for me.
We'll see...
HowardCohodas
02-07-2010, 11:54
Food for Thought - Get pragmatic and win or become a footnote in one of Sigaba's books.
ROTFLMAO
Were my gifts to increase tenfold, I doubt I'd make even a footnote in that venue. :D
armymom1228
02-07-2010, 12:45
Although in principle I supported (past tense) “The Tea Party”, I confess at that time, to very limited knowledge of their platform, thinking in my ignorance that the movement’s base comprised a mix of like minded anti-tax and limit big government people, and it does is some respects. However, as I watched, I’ve come to the conclusion that even with all the press coverage, it is really a fringe element and unconventional due to the movements position, which the CEO of the organization detail in his remarks, as group’s agenda. In doing so, I noticed my agitation increasing to disgust, as it became abundantly clear he believes his mission is ordained, when the CEO began invoking divine right/light as guidance and bible passage as confirmation; I stopped watching, but I am still disturbed. As it appears that with ever increasing frequency we are encountering groups/movements whose premises are predestine and validated religiously.
I went to thier website last night. You have to be a member to read even thier platform or any info about the group. I 'registered'...apparently you also have to be approved and vetted to join... doesn't sound like they want anyone that is not just like them to join or read or anything. Real transparent of them.
Some of the thinks that Palin said in the Q and A bothered me. Sounds far to the right far, far... she is already sorta kinda starting her prez run sounds like.
I did like most of her speech though. I saw it live.
AM
HowardCohodas
02-07-2010, 12:50
I went to thier website last night. You have to be a member to read even thier platform or any info about the group. I 'registered'...apparently you also have to be approved and vetted to join... doesn't sound like they want anyone that is not just like them to join or read or anything. Real transparent of them.
I've not been to their website. I'm suspicious of any organization that would accept me as a full member. At least this one limits me to being a guest. :D
If you go to the the link in the OP, you will see it was posted on Pajamas TV. Lots of other videos related to the convention are available there.
Surgicalcric
02-07-2010, 13:07
...Sounds far to the right far, far...
I like far to the right to be honest. We have far too many politicians riding the fence...
What exactly didnt you like?
Crip
"...... I 'registered'...apparently you also have to be approved and vetted to join... doesn't sound like they want anyone that is not just like them to join or read or anything. Real transparent of them..............."
Vetted? It appears some are unaware of the fun lefties have at trashing right side websites. And some rightsiders do it also.
This website has rules as with many others.
armymom1228
02-07-2010, 16:04
"...... I 'registered'...apparently you also have to be approved and vetted to join... doesn't sound like they want anyone that is not just like them to join or read or anything. Real transparent of them..............."
Vetted? It appears some are unaware of the fun lefties have at trashing right side websites. And some rightsiders do it also.
This website has rules as with many others.
Pete, I understand having rules and having to be authorized. But to simply read a platform? To find out more information about the Tea Party to see if they are for me? There should be a "public" part of the site, but it seems the entire site is behind closed doors so to speak.
I did not want participate in thier forum, I just wanted to read up on the tea party itself from the tea party. :confused:
....I did not want participate in thier forum, I just wanted to read up on the tea party itself from the tea party. :confused:
I think that is the part that is little understood. It seems like some want to call the Tea Party a real party and organize it and others see it as a grass roots movement. Some like to call it "conservative" and others say "people POed at everyone in washington."
The sorting out will not be to everone's liking.
armymom1228
02-07-2010, 17:02
I like far to the right to be honest. We have far too many politicians riding the fence...
What exactly didn't you like?
Crip
I am sorry, I thought I had answered this.
I have never cared for the far far out there of either side. Its not a matter of sitting on the fence. But correctly representing the best interest of ALL their constituents.
Crip, there is far right, and then there is the waaaay out there far right.
I am not talking Glenn Beck, Hannity or Rush Limbaugh. I am talking those who's both lifestyle, and poltics leaves those guys in the dust. They are as scary to me, as that of the far far left.
I am more right than moderate I guess. I like to look at each issue, do some research, see as many sides as I can find and make my own decisions. It was how I was reared. Letting others make my mind up has never been my style.
It was why I chose to listen to the Palin speech last night rather than go out to the movies with friends. Reading it is not the same as watching her, the nuances, the body language, the reception she got from her audience.
AM
Surgicalcric
02-07-2010, 20:41
SNIP
That still didnt answer what part(s) of her speech (topics) you didnt like.
I have my issues with the fringe(s) as well, though I can tolerate the right wing a good bit more than the left. Also I dont consider Libertarian as right wing...
HowardCohodas
02-07-2010, 20:44
I hope the Tea Party remains just a grass-roots movement. If it becomes a party, it will split the Republican vote too much and it also might attract all the ultra-right tinfoil hat types that I think armymom1228 is referring to (the types that reside in the Libertarian party right now and follow Ron Paul).
I believe the energy is aimed at getting people elected more than forming an independent movement. Getting people elected seems the only meaningful measure of success.
We'll see...
armymom1228
02-07-2010, 21:13
That still didnt answer what part(s) of her speech (topics) you didnt like.
I have my issues with the fringe(s) as well, though I can tolerate the right wing a good bit more than the left. Also I dont consider Libertarian as right wing...
I agree I can tolerate the right more than the far left ,or a lot of the left.
Who considers Libertarians far right?
I thought I said I liked her speech. Very well crafted and right on target. I think it scared the left. CNN was line by line fact checking today. I thought that was too amusing for words.
It was during the Q&A part where in one comment she appeared to be pandering to the far right fundie religious crowd. After reading thier discussion board, yeah they let me in the door, it appears that is what is taking over the TPN group.
The mission statement sounds good, real good. But reading the discussion board man, lets hope they do not represent mainstream TPN'ers.
I don't believe that the far out of either extreme is good for this country. At the moment we do not have balance in government. With hard work we can bring that into balance later this year.
armymom1228
02-07-2010, 21:41
I actually was wondering a bit about that myself. However I think what she was saying is that the politicians just should not be as afraid to mention God and their faith; I didn't take it that she was saying they should infuse religion into policy decisions.
I think if a politician simply mentions that they pray to God, ask for guidance, and are faithful, that is fine.
If that is what she meant, I have no problem with that.
The religious affection is not what is disconcerting to me, it’s the divine right to lead concept that disturbs my sensibilities. Righteousness is what we have been pointedly accusing Obama of uttering.
However, after some thought, I think Peregrino is correct, if the course of action requires compromise to form a winning coalition, then that’s what is done; but I do not see a winning combination of grass root political movements that are leaderless electing candidates.
HowardCohodas
02-08-2010, 04:42
Few things I have read lately have resonated as well as the following pithy comment that came from a commentator on the Tea Party Convention.
The Tea Party movement has a libertarian basis. That's libertarian with a small "l", not Libertarian as in the political party. A movement that is based on the belief that on social issues they can be liberal, while on public issues they tend to be conservative. I worked out my own simple definition of libertarianism a few years ago: I really don't care what you do, as long as you don't hurt anyone. Just don't even think about asking me to pay for it.