breaking this off from the education thread because hey, why derail it so severely?
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh:
quote:I found it kinda funny that she told reporters, "This isn't a response to Pres. Obama's State of the Union address per se." When the copies she provided the press clearly say, "Rep. Bachman's response to the State of the Union address."
Ha! Is that right? Funny and flatly deceptive, if accurate. Though par for the course, many times, with someone as nakedly partisan as that.
Par for the course for this person:
quote:Bachmann hailed the "different cultures, different backgrounds, different traditions" of the early European settlers in America, adding that the "color of their skin" or "language" or "economic status" didn't preclude them from seeking happiness.
"Once you got here, we were all the same," she said. "Isn't that remarkable? It is absolutely remarkable."
The Minnesota Republican called slavery an "evil" and "scourge" and "stain on our history."
"But we also know that the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States," Bachmann added, claiming "men like John Quincy Adams... would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country."
I would not expect any other american organization shy of the tea party to be so complicit in having her be a leader of the movement who speaks for them.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I'm not sure I get the point of this thread. Is it just to knock down Rep. Bachmann?
I don't think there's anyone here who is going to say that Michelle Bachmann isn't a shameful person to have representing you, although I could be wrong.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:I don't think there's anyone here who is going to say that Michelle Bachmann isn't a shameful person to have representing you, although I could be wrong.
Why not? We have people who are proud supporters of Sarah Palin.
[ January 27, 2011, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: I'm not sure I get the point of this thread. Is it just to knock down Rep. Bachmann?
quote:breaking this off from the education thread because hey, why derail it so severely?
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Right. My point is.
"Rep. Bachmann is a real disgrace." "Yeah, she pretty much is."
isn't really what I'd consider a severe digression. I expected some discussion of the response itself, which might engender discussion, but that didn't look like what you were going for.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
*shrug* The point of the thread seems pretty transparent to me: it hopes to start a discussion about Rep. Bachmann directly, in which hopefully supporters/defenders will come forward and be argued against.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Good luck with that. I'd be amazed if there was even *one* person that is a Michelle Bachmann fan on this board..
Mal doesn't frequent the board anymore does he?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Fan? That might be a tough sell. Someone willing to stick up for her against detractors? That's an easier sell. Time will tell.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: *shrug* The point of the thread seems pretty transparent to me: it hopes to start a discussion about Rep. Bachmann directly, in which hopefully supporters/defenders will come forward and be argued against.
No. It's literally only in the hopes that the education thread doesn't get derailed further. I wanted to post this but stopped and just put it in its own thread because I didn't want to derail that other thread any further, and thought this might hopefully end people talking about idiot political matters in the other thread.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Right. My point is.
"Rep. Bachmann is a real disgrace." "Yeah, she pretty much is."
isn't really what I'd consider a severe digression. I expected some discussion of the response itself, which might engender discussion, but that didn't look like what you were going for.
If someone wants to, they can. Bachmann being in the old thread at all was enough of a digression that I wanted to hard-shift it all the way over here. Especially considering that I didn't think I could comment on her any more without any significant further derailment being risked.
And now it's here! I win.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
(I hope)
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
For the record, I get it, and I apologize for my role in the derailment (although at the time I hadn't seen the State of the Union and wanted to participate *somehow*.)
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
I know other folks like me who sympathize with some, or most of the Tea Party ideals, but loathe the talking heads who have co-opted it for their own purposes.
They make us look ignorant - which, for all I know, could conceivably be the RNC's end goal. If so, it is a win/win - quash a rebellion, and give your most vapid figureheads a suicide mission.
Quiet down, keep in line, and maintain the Team R / Team D status quo.
<Insert mandantory "sheeple demopublican" reference here >
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Saying, "They've co-opted it from the REAL TP," is a claim I'm frankly skeptical of. They're not Pied Pipers, these commentators. It seems like something of a cop-out.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: I know other folks like me who sympathize with some, or most of the Tea Party ideals, but loathe the talking heads who have co-opted it for their own purposes.
They make us look ignorant - which, for all I know, could conceivably be the RNC's end goal. If so, it is a win/win - quash a rebellion, and give your most vapid figureheads a suicide mission.
Quiet down, keep in line, and maintain the Team R / Team D status quo.
<Insert mandantory "sheeple demopublican" reference here >
I have some very intelligent friends who openly sympathize with the Tea Party and try to support it. The only way you kick out the morons is to have an influx of people of integrity who can become the leadership.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Saying, "They've co-opted it from the REAL TP," is a claim I'm frankly skeptical of. They're not Pied Pipers, these commentators. It seems like something of a cop-out.
"Pied Pipers" isn't a fair characterization of my argument. I do think it's a fair characterization of what Palin et al are attempting, though.
I don't want to fall in to the trap of pretending there is an IEEE standard for what is or is not a TP stance. Perhaps my choice of words doesn't adequately communicate this. I, and many that I know/read about, are just cynical about a soundbyte generator becoming assoicated with ideals that we care about.
BB, I have no doubt that, in the abstract, that is true. However, in reality, ideas are colored by association with individuals/ideologies, or by a war of definition with people who disagree. Eventually some ideas are so colored that they immediately label those that hold them. My concern is that Palin is, by simple fact of who she is, poisoning the well.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:"Pied Pipers" isn't a fair characterization of my argument.
It sounds like it is, that is to say you want to distance yourself from what some of the more objectionable TP commentators are saying by suggesting, "They don't reflect real TP values." I'm dubious of that claim for the simple reason that I wonder how these commentators got to be so popular among folks who support the Tea Party, Swampjedi. It didn't happen by magic is my point, and frankly wondering if there isn't some conspiracy at work doesn't sound like thinking very in keeping with conservative ideals, when other possibilities less politically pleasing but much more likely are right at hand.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
true scotsmanship battles are actually remarkably prevalent in the tea party right now. No, I'm not saying that to get digs at it. There's just a large amount of infighting over what the True movement is, and who really represents it, and the largest volume of it kicked up when there was a tea party express schism — Mark Williams went off the deep end with his racist diatribes and other tea party leaders and non-TPE factions tried to write him off, and the TPE as the largest individual tea party organized faction, of course, wanted to stay on the tea party bandwagon, and, well..
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
I think I see where you are coming from.
It's a hard thing to express without True Scotsman language.
I am not a True Scotsman myself, because I have trouble cramming everything into a single unified model.
Perhaps I should phrase it like this - Palin assoicates herself with ideas that I hold dear. Being who she is, she reflects poorly on those ideas.
She's not a True SwampJedi.
I have no doubt that there are Palins who taint some of your ideals, as well. That's the nature of things, if only because sensation sells.
My original post, then, should be modified to say: "I know other folks like me who sympathize with some, or most of the Tea Party ideals, but loathe the talking heads who have associated themselves with those ideals."
The question of the RNC is a bit more sticky, though. I'm convinced they're working to avoid a party schism - which makes sense in a way, because both parts of the party would be reduced in effectiveness.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
They are, and it's part of why bachmann gets to run her own tea party sotu address over boenher's objections.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
They are trying to avoid schisming, and it's part of why bachmann gets to run her own tea party sotu address over boenher's (light) objections.