Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Blakenzy on March 14, 2010, 04:32:47 PM
-
Coffee Party brews up rival for Tea Party
A grassroots US political grouping that has emerged in opposition to the conservative Tea Party movement has been holding its first national day of meetings.
Read here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8566574.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8566574.stm)
OK, who's up for a Cocoa Party? (marshmallows not included)
-
"The two-party structure is just not working. There are so many of us who feel these labels are outdated, that we're much more complex and interconnected. And people are coming to us exhilarated that there's finally a place for them to have a voice," she says.
Yawn. Everybody says this, but nothing ever comes of it.
I'm sure Pelosi, et al, will be sure to warn us that they are merely astroturf. ;/
-
So it is a bunch of D's getting together? ???
-
Actually, the coffee party was founded by an Obama campaign worker. Make what you will of that.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/coffee-party-founder-is-obama-campaign-operative.html (http://www.prisonplanet.com/coffee-party-founder-is-obama-campaign-operative.html)
-
So it is a bunch of D's getting together? ???
Getting together and getting favorable press coverage.
We just need to wait until the time is right for the rum party. Have some rum, dress up like pirates, sail up the potomac and storm the city.
-
"In a sharp contrast to the Tea Party movement, members are asked to take the following civility pledge:
As a member or supporter of the Coffee Party, I pledge to conduct myself in a way that is civil, honest, and respectful toward people with whom I disagree. I value people from different cultures, I value people with different ideas, and I value and cherish the democratic process."
I don't think they understand. We ARE being civil. With a few notable exceptions, we left our rifles in our closets when we came out to protest.
-
"In a sharp contrast to the Tea Party movement, members are asked to take the following civility pledge:
As a member or supporter of the Coffee Party, I pledge to conduct myself in a way that is civil, honest, and respectful toward people with whom I disagree. I value people from different cultures, I value people with different ideas, and I value and cherish the democratic process."
I don't think they understand. We ARE being civil. With a few notable exceptions, we left our rifles in our closets when we came out to protest.
Heh.
-
Heh.
What's really funny is if you take a look at any of their webpages that have comment sections. It looks like Democratic Underground. And it's not just random commentators; it's often the founders of the "Coffee Party" as well. So much for being civil...
-
The Left has never been civil. Mostly they are what they accuse others of.
-
What's really funny is if you take a look at any of their webpages that have comment sections. It looks like Democratic Underground. And it's not just random commentators; it's often the founders of the "Coffee Party" as well. So much for being civil...
One should go through all of the discussions of their group, quote every disparaging and disrespectful comment, and just write "and respectful toward people with whom I disagree." underneath the quoted text. Don't add your own $.02, comments, or insults of your own. Don't even respond to questions or attacks at you. Just quote their disrespectful comments, and write the part of their creed underneath it for every one.
-
I perused their forum and I already see not just cracks, but gaping holes in their foundation. Several posts were asking what specifically is the ideology of this group or specifically how they intend to effect some of the changes they spout in their rhetoric only to go unanswered. I'd say even money that this group implodes on itself. Here's one gem of a post from their forum:
"Im confused -Thought this was a new diverse grassroots group open to ideas and change???" (http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/content/im-confused-thought-was-new-diverse-grassroots-group-open-ideas-and-change)
When I first heard about this group my mind immediately went back to the doctrine of "emotional response v. lucid decision making." Some of the more base concepts that come to mind: Demeaning the Tea Party by creating a fad of beverage named political groups and appealing to a vague sense of Americana via the cultural consuming of the two. I.e. the evil Imperial British drink tea, and the good Democratic Americans drink coffee, therefore Coffee > Tea.
These were just a couple of notions flitting through my mind however so take them with a grain of salt. I'm curious what possible impressions or perhaps emotional responses other people had regarding the choice in naming however.
-
I perused their forum and I already see not just cracks, but gaping holes in their foundation. Several posts were asking what specifically is the ideology of this group or specifically how they intend to effect some of the changes they spout in their rhetoric only to go unanswered. I'd say even money that this group implodes on itself. Here's one gem of a post from their forum:
"Im confused -Thought this was a new diverse grassroots group open to ideas and change???" (http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/content/im-confused-thought-was-new-diverse-grassroots-group-open-ideas-and-change)
When I first heard about this group my mind immediately went back to the doctrine of "emotional response v. lucid decision making." Some of the more base concepts that come to mind: Demeaning the Tea Party by creating a fad of beverage named political groups and appealing to a vague sense of Americana via the cultural consuming of the two. I.e. the evil Imperial British drink tea, and the good Democratic Americans drink coffee, therefore Coffee > Tea.
Emotional response is not always a bad thing. For instance the "Tea Party" name resonated very well with conservatives. Don't forget that the genesis of the Tea Parties was not HEALTHCARE as the media would have you believe but they actually started last April on tax day as a reaction to the BAILOUTS...long before the health care debate started up steam. Granted things heated up during the summer.
And the idea of us Republicans putting on our war paint and going out and making as much racket as possible instead of meekly standing by like we have since 1994, and putting a historical spin on it. Emotional response? Absolutely. No problem there.
The Liberal emotional response, rather than indicating a change in attitude (which the Tea Parties were IMHO) was simply a "we can do it better than them" reaction. And it will fail miserably, since the mental image of a bunch of fake intellectuals sitting in coffee clatches isn't nearly as much fun as a bunch of gun-owning, tax-hating, had-enough conservatives stirring up outrage in the public square.
And I am perfectly OK with that.
-
Getting together and getting favorable press coverage.
We just need to wait until the time is right for the rum party. Have some rum, dress up like pirates, sail up the potomac and storm the city.
I am SO in for that one!!!
-
Getting together and getting favorable press coverage.
We just need to wait until the time is right for the rum party. Have some rum, dress up like pirates, sail up the potomac and storm the city.
Read here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8566574.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8566574.stm)
OK, who's up for a Cocoa Party? (marshmallows not included)
All we need is the Smore Schnapps party.
-
Emotional response is not always a bad thing. For instance the "Tea Party" name resonated very well with conservatives. Don't forget that the genesis of the Tea Parties was not HEALTHCARE as the media would have you believe but they actually started last April on tax day as a reaction to the BAILOUTS...long before the health care debate started up steam. Granted things heated up during the summer.
And the idea of us Republicans putting on our war paint and going out and making as much racket as possible instead of meekly standing by like we have since 1994, and putting a historical spin on it. Emotional response? Absolutely. No problem there.
The Liberal emotional response, rather than indicating a change in attitude (which the Tea Parties were IMHO) was simply a "we can do it better than them" reaction. And it will fail miserably, since the mental image of a bunch of fake intellectuals sitting in coffee clatches isn't nearly as much fun as a bunch of gun-owning, tax-hating, had-enough conservatives stirring up outrage in the public square.
And I am perfectly OK with that.
Excellent response. Do you think perhaps there should be a distinction between attempting to incite an emotional response with a factual basis as the core and inciting such a response in order to obscure the lack of such a basis?
-
All we need is the Smore Schnapps party.
Uisge beatha partaidh =D
-
Emotional response is not always a bad thing. For instance the "Tea Party" name resonated very well with conservatives. Don't forget that the genesis of the Tea Parties was not HEALTHCARE as the media would have you believe but they actually started last April on tax day as a reaction to the BAILOUTS...long before the health care debate started up steam. Granted things heated up during the summer.
And the idea of us Republicans putting on our war paint and going out and making as much racket as possible instead of meekly standing by like we have since 1994, and putting a historical spin on it. Emotional response? Absolutely. No problem there.
The Liberal emotional response, rather than indicating a change in attitude (which the Tea Parties were IMHO) was simply a "we can do it better than them" reaction. And it will fail miserably, since the mental image of a bunch of fake intellectuals sitting in coffee clatches isn't nearly as much fun as a bunch of gun-owning, tax-hating, had-enough conservatives stirring up outrage in the public square.
And I am perfectly OK with that.
The main problem I see with the name is that "drinking" tea has nothing at all to do with the "tea party" name origin. The term "coffee party" has absolutely no significance to American culture or history. I wonder how many of them could actually tell you what the Boston Tea Party was. I bet some would say it was a protest held last year.
-
Uisge beatha partaidh =D
Water of life party seconded. =D
-
The main problem I see with the name is that "drinking" tea has nothing at all to do with the "tea party" name origin. The term "coffee party" has absolutely no significance to American culture or history. I wonder how many of them could actually tell you what the Boston Tea Party was. I bet some would say it was a protest held last year.
MechAg94, you are so right it isn't even funny. :facepalm:
-
I think if the 2012 election goes poorly we can move on to cocktail hour. Free engraved zippo when you join the party, BYOB and rag. =D
-
Don't forget that the genesis of the Tea Parties was not HEALTHCARE as the media would have you believe but they actually started last April on tax day as a reaction to the BAILOUTS..
No, they started before that, as a response to bail-outs and other gov spending. Sometime in February, I think.
-
All we need is the Smore Schnapps party.
will the ICE101 (http://www.drinksmixer.com/desc1010.html) and Firewater (http://www.drinksmixer.com/desc598.html) party do? ??? [popcorn] hurry up and finish shooting the ice is melting. :facepalm:
-
How about the Beer Party? Bet it garners most of the college kid votes who think they are voting for a kegger.
-
And it will fail miserably, since the mental image of a bunch of fake intellectuals sitting in coffee clatches isn't nearly as much fun as a bunch of gun-owning, tax-hating, had-enough conservatives stirring up outrage in the public square.
You said it! Except it's not a bunch, but a few...
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prisonplanet.com%2Fimages%2Fmarch2010%2F150310top2.jpg&hash=ce33b16eb840f64f0f9fb44f1572ea24daa04852)
-
I like tea better than coffee. Mainly because it goes better with ice.
-
Water of life party seconded. =D
See, some people here can actually understand me ;)
-
Somewhat. :lol:
My friend Briody is near desperation in trying to teach me Gaelic.
-
See, some people here can actually understand me ;)
I know what you mean by "water of life," so at least I meet you half-way.
-
It seems to me that if Republicans didn't want Obama (or Hillary) in the Whitehouse, they would have run someone other than McCain. Just sayin', Ol' John was a loser from the beginning. That said, how is Obama so different than GWB. We got the same giveaways to Wall Street, the same Afghan war, and the same big .gov.
-
It seems to me that if Republicans didn't want Obama (or Hillary) in the Whitehouse, they would have run someone other than McCain. Just sayin', Ol' John was a loser from the beginning. That said, how is Obama so different than GWB. We got the same giveaways to Wall Street, the same Afghan war, and the same big .gov.
I'm still of the opinion that the Republicans didn't think they had a chance of winning in '08, so they let McCain get the nomination.
-
Excellent response. Do you think perhaps there should be a distinction between attempting to incite an emotional response with a factual basis as the core and inciting such a response in order to obscure the lack of such a basis?
Click for Goldwater goodness:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVNoClu0h9M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVNoClu0h9M)