Comments on: Tea Party: Pro-Torture, Pro-War, Pro-Freedom?

By: anonymous

anonymous — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 04:54:14 +0000

Thank you for these informative comments. I have had similar observations and without bias, similar conclusions. Glad to know it just wasn’t me.

By: Isa Kocher

Isa Kocher — Thu, 06 May 2010 16:03:28 +0000

you can spot the tea baggers so easily. they can’t spell. can’t carry an argument to a conclusion. offer no solutions. know no facts. engage in personal and four letter word foul mouth abuse. most teabaggers worked for the government and have government pensions, and live on government subsidies. e.g. michelle bachman gets millions from the department of agriculture. i am a usa service connected 100% disabled american veteran and i sacrificed my life so they can spread hate. thanks guys.

By: Sean O'Neil

Sean O'Neil — Sat, 01 May 2010 19:50:21 +0000

Jim — it’s been a while since I left a comment here but I’ve been reading you pretty frequently since my last comment. I’m glad you wrote the Xtian Sci essay and also glad you’ve brought our attention to the responses to that essay. We’re in a really bad situation here in America right now — I agree with what Chris Baker says in this thread, that the recent Tea Party movement started out of good, principled objections to Fed Govt misdeeds, but somehow it’s been co-opted by forces who only want to divide the disaffected people who might unite under a Tea Party banner.

It’s frustrating as hell to watch this devolution.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 00:37:46 +0000

“Gary P: Bouvard, you are a liberal idiot. Warring, wiretapping, or waterboarding.”

Jim,

I personally thought this line of your’s was quite clever and very true. A number of these folks really are against only certain types of govt. spending.

Too bad these idiots don’t seem to know who you are. Apparently, their computer skills are confined to listening to frauds like Limbaugh and the others who want to hijack them for the Stupid party. In short, we see here a massive outbreak of “hannitization”.

On the other hand, those comments read like a good number I’ve received on Town Hall and for a brief period, “Free” Republic, so I know how it feels to be misunderstood.

By: Chris Baker

Chris Baker — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:47:24 +0000

I attended some of the first tea parties. They were truly principled, as they were protests in the fall of 2008 against the federal bailouts. Those people were mostly “Ron Paul Red Teamers.”

The movement was hijacked and taken over with hardly a fight. There is one element you forget, Jim. A lot of these people also want to “secure the border.” They are the types who consider Ramos and Compean “heroes.”

By: Brian Wilson

Brian Wilson — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:29:17 +0000

It is unfortunate that Mr. Bovard cannot see the forest through the trees…>>>

Finally! The Tea Party movement has its long-lost leader: Mrs. Malaprop!

What a magnificent cacophony of aggressive ignorance.

We can applaud those in the “movement” who actually picked up and (allegedly) read the Constitution. Sadly,”Reading For Comprehension”has not been a part of the Government School kurikulum for years.

“I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you”.

Brian Wilson

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 03:07:18 +0000

Jean, I am mystified at the distinctions many of the Tea Partiers draw regarding Bush and Obama.

I hope that a more principled opposition to Leviathan can promptly arise - but I am not optimistic.

By: Jean

Jean — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 20:09:53 +0000

So, let me get this straight, they hate big government but only under Democratic leadership. But yet, this same Democractic leadership is continuing the fight in Afghanistan, continuing the occupation of Iraq, and is still rattling the sabres against Iran.
GW gave us the biggest wealth distribution program in American history, and piggybacking on that Obama is contiuning the government take over of health care.
And according to Sibel Edmonds, the famed ex-FBI translator turned biggest pain in the ass for biggest government lovers, has stated that she thought GW’s adminstration was secretative, but Obama is passing him in nearly everything that has been presented concerning whistleblowers.
To be honest, I hope this Tea Party movement dies, and in it’s place a far more principled group arises. One that backs the sovergnity of the individual, and basically puts the government back where it belongs. DEFENDING EVERY INDIVIDUALS RIGHTS!!
Jim, I hope you’re ignoring those blowhards.

By: BOVARD » Tea Party Pushback

BOVARD » Tea Party Pushback — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 01:03:47 +0000

[...] Christian Science Monitor op-ed is spurring some uplifting responses in various postings around the [...]

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 01:00:12 +0000

Ya, principles wouldn’t pass the focus group testing.

By: Dirk W. Sabin

Dirk W. Sabin — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:20:18 +0000

Denouncing Big Government while claiming support for George W. Bush is a lot crazier than claiming modesty while sun-bathing on a nude beach. No…this is a far greater cognitive dissonance. It’s like exclaiming ones principles of sacrifice and loyalty while resigning from an office elected into before jetting off to a first class junket into Media Celebrity.

But then, who stands on principle anymore? It’s such a constraining thing and gets in the way of a proper message.

By: Chuck Dahmer

Chuck Dahmer — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 19:12:06 +0000

Jim. I’m not a tea-party-er. I often call attention to these same contradictions coming from people declaring, “I’m for small government and liberty but…” just before advocating for intervention in business or foreign affairs.

To my mind, the minute the media and politicians turned tea party into a movement, it was dead.

The devil is not in the details, it’s in the principles. Principles are uncompromising. They always apply. Adopting them for the sake of convenience won’t work.