Controversial Tea Party convention aims to boost the movement - Polidicks

[QUOTE] (CNN) - What's being billed as the first national Tea Party convention opens its doors Thursday night amid widespread interest and some controversy. Organizers hope the three-day event will help strengthen the year-old anti-big-government movement. On its Web site, organizer Tea Party Nation says the event is "aimed at bringing the Tea Party Movement leaders together from around the nation for the purpose of networking and supporting the movement's multiple organizations' principal goals." But there has been pushback against the convention and its organizers from both outsiders and some in the movement because of Tea Party Nation's for-profit status and because the price of entry attendees have paid for access to the workshops and seminars being held through Saturday. Red State blogger Erick Erickson wrote that while he has good things to say about some groups within the Tea Party, "this national tea party convention smells scammy." Mark Meckler said he and Jenny Beth Martin, co-founders of the Tea Party Patriots, aren't participating in the convention because "it wasn't the kind of grass-roots organization that we are, so we declined to participate." Organizers say some 600 people have paid $549 each to attend the convention and that the event is sold out. But they add that tickets costing $349 are still available for Saturday night's banquet, where former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin will give the convention's keynote address. Sherry Phillips, who along with her husband, Nashville attorney Judson Phillips, founded Tea Party Nation, said earlier this week in a message to supporters that "we fully expect to break even at this event. We may even make a few thousand dollars to cover local operating costs of TPN." Phillips also fired back at her critics, saying, "We never did this to make us rich or famous. Quite the contrary, we are patriots who love our country, our members and the people who are coming to Nashville to attend this great event." As for Palin, neither the convention organizers nor a spokeswoman for the former governor would confirm reports that the former governor is getting paid around $100,000 for her keynote appearance. "I will not benefit financially from speaking at this event," Palin said in a statement this week. "Any compensation for my appearance will go right back to the cause." As controversy surrounds the convention, tensions have been rising among Tea Party activists. Rival factions are battling over who will carry the Tea Party banner, and others worry that powerful groups are "Astroturfing" what they think should remain a grass-roots group. Last week two major speakers scheduled for the convention dropped out of the lineup. Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota announced that they would not attend the convention, which is being held at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center in Nashville. Blackburn was scheduled to serve as a featured speaker and introduce Palin. Bachman was scheduled to serve as one of the convention's kickoff speakers. Both are strong supporters of the Tea Party movement. Both said the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct advised them not to participate because of the convention's for-profit status. And both said the canceling of their speeches is not a sign that their commitment to the Tea Party movement is fading. But speeches from top conservative politicians are not the focus of the convention. Panels, sessions and workshops appear to be the bread and butter of this event. Among the sessions scheduled for Friday are ones on how to conduct voter registration drives and where to find conservative votes, women in politics, how to organize a Tea Party group, how to involve youth in the conservative movement, grass-roots "on the ground," how to unite state Tea Party groups, technology in the Tea Party movement, and why Christians must engage. "This convention is a way to galvanize the conservative movement in a way that the general rallies do not," said Mark Skoda, who's serving as spokesman for the convention and who will be leading the panel on technology in the movement. –CNN's Kristi Keck contributed to this report. [img]http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/02/04/gal.teaparty0204.gi.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/04/controversial-tea-party-convention-aims-to-boost-the-movement/?fbid=pJzpwS-ZFIO#more-89005[/url] The Republican Party formed in 1854, and in just six years, it won the presidency after its first convention. Just a little historical note. :patriot:

Wait wait wait. Id bone palin.

Oh hey, Emperor Scorpious made a thread about right wing political movements.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;20036227]Oh hey, Emperor Scorpious made a thread about right wing political movements.[/QUOTE] Oh hey, it's a political movement, deal with it. Thanks for spelling my name right, btw.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;20036227]Oh hey, Emperor Scorpious made a thread about right wing political movements.[/QUOTE] empty quote

Tea Party members are douches.

Tea Party isn't going anywhere. 1.) The name is retarded 2.) It is a single party issue. "Don't take mah taxes". It doesn't have enough diversity to last anywhere. Look back to the 1800's. The Know-Nothing party was the same thing.

[QUOTE=Neolk;20036382]Tea Party isn't going anywhere. 1.) The name is retarded 2.) It is a single party issue. "Don't take mah taxes". It doesn't have enough diversity to last anywhere. Look back to the 1800's. The Know-Nothing party was the same thing.[/QUOTE] It's not one issue. [url]http://www.freedomworks.org/issues[/url]

[QUOTE=Neolk;20036382]Tea Party isn't going anywhere. 1.) The name is retarded 2.) It is a single party issue. "Don't take mah taxes". It doesn't have enough diversity to last anywhere. Look back to the 1800's. The Know-Nothing party was the same thing.[/QUOTE] Don't tread on me. :hurr:

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;20036262]Oh hey, it's a political movement, deal with it. Thanks for spelling my name right, btw.[/QUOTE] No it isn't it's a for-profit company.

I love how the most conservative and christian people of the US are the same people who would pretty much do anything to anything to avoid paying taxes, and helping the poor. Not very christian tbh.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;20036153]Source: [url]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/04/controversial-tea-party-convention-aims-to-boost-the-movement/?fbid=pJzpwS-ZFIO#more-89005[/url] The Republican Party formed in 1854, and in just six years, it won the presidency after its first convention. Just a little historical note. :patriot:[/QUOTE] And that was back when it was a moderate-liberal party that opposed the spread of slavery in the western territories and was in no way like the party it is now. The same can be applied to the Democrats but then I don't see anyone boasting about popular Jackson was at the time it came out from obscurity.

Jackson was the coolest president. On topic, what the hell is up with that flag?

These Tea Party fags need to go die in a fire.

for being a "people's movement", it seems that the vast majority of the teabaggers are lower and upper middle class white people. doesnt sound very encompassing of america to me

[QUOTE=Ziron;20037778]for being a "people's movement", it seems that the vast majority of the teabaggers are lower and upper middle class white people. doesnt sound very encompassing of america to me[/QUOTE] But not middle-middle class?

[QUOTE=Mingebox;20037892]But not middle-middle class?[/QUOTE] eh i havent seen a lot of middle middle class people in the tea party protest photos

Wasn't the early republican party a lot more like how the democrats are today? I seem to recall they gradually switched polarities at one time.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;20037915]Wasn't the early republican party a lot more like how the democrats are today? I seem to recall they gradually switched polarities at one time.[/QUOTE] they were, especially the radical republicans, they were kickass. now the current party is filled with christian diehards that doesn't give a shit how big the government is, as long they can go against liberals, they spout bullshit.

[QUOTE=Ziron;20037900]eh i havent seen a lot of middle middle class people in the tea party protest photos[/QUOTE] Holy shit, you can tell someone's economic status [i]just by looking at them??[/i] :monocle:

Tea Partyers are even more conservative than republicans. That's bad, Since the republicans are already too conservative for the United States.

[QUOTE=cyanide101;20041525]Tea Partyers are even more conservative than republicans. That's bad, Since the republicans are already too conservative for the United States.[/QUOTE] Considering that they want [i]less[/i] government, they're actually more liberal. :downs:

I don't understand the above statement.

I don't get this thing, I like tea as much as the next man, probably even more, but a convention?

[QUOTE=Lambeth;20043772]I don't understand the above statement.[/QUOTE] More government = Conservative Less government = Liberal Liberal, derived from the word "liberty" meaning "freedom". Freedom, meaning less control. Governments control, regardless of their politics. Thus, less government = less control = more freedom = liberty = liberals. [editline]03:18PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Sh33p;20043814]I don't get this thing, I like tea as much as the next man, probably even more, but a convention?[/QUOTE] I swear, you must be a tea addict, because every thread about this you mention your love of tea so much. And your avatar just gives a stronger impression of this. :downs:

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;20041682]Considering that they want [i]less[/i] government, they're actually more liberal. :downs:[/QUOTE] that only means they lean more towards classical liberalism, that doesn't mean they're 'more liberal' because there is no such thing. also its pretty dumb to say conservatives want less government. gay rights, the war on drugs, and aggressive foreign policy are a few examples of 'big government' policies

[QUOTE=Conscript;20043930]that only means they lean more towards classical liberalism, that doesn't mean they're 'more liberal' because there is no such thing. also its pretty dumb to say conservatives want less government. gay rights, the war on drugs, and aggressive foreign policy are a few examples of 'big government' policies[/QUOTE] It's my opinion that both the Republicans AND Democrats are conservatives. Republicans in a social sense, and Democrats in an economical and governmental sense. Now only if we could get something that wants liberty socially [i]and[/i] economically... ....I think I'm a Libertarian! :buddy:

You're right they are both conservative. But in my opinion, only because they need to be.

[QUOTE=Conscript;20044166]You're right they are both conservative. But in my opinion, only because they need to be.[/QUOTE] Just for curiosity's sake, why is it needed?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;20036395]It's not one issue. [url]http://www.freedomworks.org/issues[/url][/QUOTE] Lawl, you just posed the exact reason the teabaggers are full of shit. Freedomworks is in the professional corporate shilling business, they get paid to organize stuff like this to dupe stupid, scared, old white people into attending their protests and making it look like some massive spontaneous political movement. In one way or another, they lie about every issue on that page. -The government doesn't slow telecommunications innovation, the telecom giants they support suppress competition and innovation, that's why our infrastructure sucks compared to everyone else. -Creating retirement security by privatizing Social Security? So people's social security accounts can be wiped out overnight by market crashes like the one that just happened? -Shutting down the EPA to save the environment. Right. Don't even get me started on their role in killing healthcare, they're the ones who did everything in their power to propagate the "it kills old people and helps illegals" shit that was proven time and time again to be 100% fabricated. They were founded by Republicans, are run by Republicans, and are completely funded by Republican business interests. It's not a "movement", it's corporate astroturfing.