Tea Party Convention

[Sporanox]

Except maybe for the ones holding a National Tea Party Convention who probably do see this as a more unified national organization.

But I understand, they're not true Scotsmen Tea Partisans.

Organizing a national convention doesn't invalidate your TP card (again, the strength of the movement is precisely the way that it brings so many different people together), but it's not a smart move regardless.

 

[quarky]

Shame is, the Boston Tea Party, and the tea that got dumped in the harbor, is grossly misunderstood.

Like, 180 degrees.

 

[King of the Americas]

OMG...

The Sarah Plan for national security, wait for it...

"We win they lose."

She got applause.

---

"Run Sarah Run, RUN Sarah RUN, RUN SARAH RUN!"

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Sarah Palin on NOW!

I would watch, but there's this Seinfeld rerun on that I've only seen 37 times.

 

[King of the Americas]

I would watch, but there's this Seinfeld rerun on that I've only seen 37 times.

The comedic value was comparable...

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

The comedic value was comparable...

I'm sure I'll catch some clips on YouTube.

 

[King of the Americas]

I'm sure I'll catch some clips on YouTube.

Hold on, the depth of content and specifics she offered was truly shocking...

My above quote was sincere.

That was truly her entire plan for national security..."We win they lose."

Why didn't the Democrats think of it before, it's so simple!

Then the Tea Party Convention went into a mild "Run Sarah Run!".

And this is viability...? I think not.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Really, "very specific", really? 26% weren't sure, how is that specific?

That 26% of democrats polled weren't sure if 9/11 was an inside job or not at the time of the poll.

 

[King of the Americas]

That 26% of democrats polled weren't sure if 9/11 was an inside job or not at the time of the poll.

"...weren't sure..."

...is the key phrase there.

Not being 'sure' about something is the same thing as "not knowing", because all of the evidence isn't in yet.

Would we get the same number today? I really doubt it.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

"...weren't sure..."

...is the key phrase there.

Not being 'sure' about something is the same thing as "not knowing", because all of the evidence isn't in yet.

Actually, there is two key phrases. "Not sure" and "9/11". We are talking about the biggest mass murder in US history. It's not the same as not being sure about wether to have the steak or the chicken.

And there were 35% of democrats polled who were sure that Bush was behind 9/11.

Would we get the same number today? I really doubt it.

So do I.

Those of us who have been tracking the 9/11 twoofers have seen the so-called "movement" all but completely self annihilate. Nothing kills a conspiracy theory quite like electoral success. The biggest drop in 9/11 kookery coincided with the democrats big wins in the 2006 mid-term elections.

If you polled republicans on wether they think Obama was born in Kenya or is the anti-christ before and after the recent string of republican wins, I think you'll find a similar drop.

It will be interesting to see what happens to birther thoeries after this November.

 

[tyr_13]

So, a thread about the Tea Party Convention is really about Democrats and 9/11 truth?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

So, a thread about the Tea Party Convention is really about Democrats and 9/11 truth?

Actually it started as another thinly veiled "Some republicans are birthers, therefore the GOP should split up" thread.

But no one seems able to explain why the same should not have applied to democrats and 9/11 truthers.

 

[Brainster]

Actually, there is two key phrases. "Not sure" and "9/11". We are talking about the biggest mass murder in US history. It's not the same as not being sure about wether to have the steak or the chicken.

And there were 35% of democrats polled who were sure that Bush was behind 9/11.



So do I.

Those of us who have been tracking the 9/11 twoofers have seen the so-called "movement" all but completely self annihilate. Nothing kills a conspiracy theory quite like electoral success. The biggest drop in 9/11 kookery coincided with the democrats big wins in the 2006 mid-term elections.

If you polled republicans on wether they think Obama was born in Kenya or is the anti-christ before and after the recent string of republican wins, I think you'll find a similar drop.

It will be interesting to see what happens to birther thoeries after this November.

Dingdingding!

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Update: Andrew Brietbart was seen taking Birther Joseph Farah to the woodshed at the Tea Party:

“It’s self-indulgent, it’s narcissistic, it’s a losing issue,” Breitbart told Schilling. “It’s a losing situation. If you don’t have the frigging evidence — raising the question? You can do that to Republicans all day long. You have to disprove that you’re a racist! Forcing them to disprove something is a nightmare.”

“Wouldn’t you say,” asked Schilling, “in this case, that Farah is asking Obama to prove something rather than his disprove it?”

Breitbart rejected the premise. “When has a president ever been asked to prove his citizenship?”

Hotair is reporting that the Tea Party will issue a formal denouncement of birtherism:

Update: HA commenter Knucklehead says that Carl Cameron at Fox reported a few minutes ago that other Tea Party organizations will hold a presser later today to condemn Birtherism and distance themselves from it. That sounds like a healthy decision.

 

[King of the Americas]

Actually, there is two key phrases. "Not sure" and "9/11". We are talking about the biggest mass murder in US history. It's not the same as not being sure about wether to have the steak or the chicken.

And there were 35% of democrats polled who were sure that Bush was behind 9/11.

I'll concede your second point, but would ask if that particular poll was taken before or after the 9/11 Commission had published its findings?

 

[King of the Americas]

Actually it started as another thinly veiled "Some republicans are birthers, therefore the GOP should split up" thread.

But no one seems able to explain why the same should not have applied to democrats and 9/11 truthers.

Aheem...the thread was always intended to discuss the Tea Party Convention, and what the speakers were saying and getting applause for.

Farrah got BIG applause for the birther rant, so maybe Brietbart should have stood up and denounced the cheering as well.

Farrah 'looked' as if he was speaking from a set of notes, did the Tea Party NOT know what Worldnetdaily is all about? During the convention it was touted as THE best news site ever!

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I'll concede your second point, but would ask if that particular poll was taken before or after the 9/11 Commission had published its findings?

The date on the poll is May 2007. Which is odd now that I look at it, because it seems oddly high for being after the 2006 elections.

I still believe that you and I are right though, that the number would be significantly lower if the poll were taken today.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Aheem...the thread was always intended to discuss the Tea Party Convention, and what the speakers were saying and getting applause for.

People who would never vote republican offering the "friendly advice" that the GOP should break up has been a recurring theme around here.

When I saw it crop up again, I reflexively thought "Oh look, they're doing it again". My apologies.

Farrah got BIG applause for the birther rant, so maybe Brietbart should have stood up and denounced the cheering as well.

Farrah 'looked' as if he was speaking from a set of notes, did the Tea Party NOT know what Worldnetdaily is all about? During the convention it was touted as THE best news site ever!

Farah is a twit. He's going to be burning a lot of bridges if he keeps doing things like publicly insulting Andrew Brietbart.

He may make himself a self-rectifying problem.

 

[A'isha]

And there were 35% of democrats polled who were sure that Bush was behind 9/11.

Not that LIHOP theories aren't as stupid as MIHOP, but "knew about it beforehand" is not even close to being the same as "was behind it".

 

[King of the Americas]

People who would never vote republican offering the "friendly advice" that the GOP should break up has been a recurring theme around here.

When I saw it crop up again, I reflexively thought "Oh look, they're doing it again". My apologies.

Farah is a twit. He's going to be burning a lot of bridges if he keeps doing things like publicly insulting Andrew Brietbart.

He may make himself a self-rectifying problem.

No worries, mate. (Damn you, Dave!)

"Farah"...my bad.

But, how has he gotten this far??? Did the Tea Party Convention organizers ever visit Worldnetdaily.com...?

---

Here's Farah's Speech:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/219195

Palin's:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/291974-3