OKC Tea Party, July 4th, 10 am to 12 am, State Capitol steps

[Easy180]

My friend's dad, a self-professed tea-bagger, claims that Obama is secretly working with Chavez and Fidel Castro to create a Western communist triad. He also said Jews were behind 9-11. And, he believes that Obama's going to send armed thugs to take his guns away from him. Racist? Maybe a little. Loony? 100 percent.

You are friends with the Inhofes?

[julieriggs]

I thought the Tea Parties were originally inspired by Libertarian-leaning folk, and were then enthusiastically joined by a bunch of disgruntled Republicans. When someone calls the Tea Party bipartisan, they are referring to the fact that all of these people agree that higher taxation/higher government spending is a bad thing - even though they may all disagree on other political topics. I've never seen or heard anything racist or bigoted out of the Tea Party people.

Disagreeing with President Obama does not make one racist or bigoted.

Also, off topic, I had a BLAST with friends at the Gay Pride events on 39th on Friday evening. A wonderful time with a wonderfully kind crowd. If the OKCTALK board keeps posts about HOG events, 4th of July celebrations, and Tea Parties on the OKC Metro Area Talk board... they should keep the Gay Pride post here as well.

[soonerguru]

Disagreeing with President Obama does not make one racist or bigoted.

True, but there has been an epic uptick in racist hate group recruitment since Obama took office, and many people, including some of the tea baggers, are frankly paranoid about the election. And not necessarily because of high government spending; if that were a problem, they would have been having a conniption fit about spending by the GOP and Bush the last eight years.

In addition to the new neo-Nazis, we have seen an uptick in right wingers actually shooting people they disagree with, like the people at that Unitarian church in Knoxville, the abortion clinic in Kansas, the security guard at the Holocaust Museum, etc. etc.

Don't try to act like this is all legitimate, civil disagreement, because that is a nice fantasy.

Some of these people are seriously unhinged -- and armed.

[Luke]

True, but there has been an epic uptick in racist hate group recruitment since Obama took office...

Are you just eyeballin' it or is there a stat somewhere?

[Midtowner]

I'd say correlation doesn't equal causation, but you haven't even established a correlation. Different people have done different things in response to different events and for different reasons.

Uttering the magical combination of words "right wing" doesn't magically tie them all together with a bow as you imply.

[soonerguru]

Are you just eyeballin' it or is there a stat somewhere?

No. I don't patrol neo-nazi groups. I can't work that into my schedule.

It has been thoroughly reported by Newsweek, Time, AP and others going back to September.

Also, the FBI, whose job it is to track such groups, and Homeland Security, have made public statements about the increase in membership, online traffic, and, worst of all, threats made by these groups.

I seriously wish this weren't the case, but I can see how if you're racist the election of a black guy would make you feel a little crazy.

There were people selling racist stuff at the Tulsa State Fair during the election season, showing Obama in a noose, appearing as a monkey, etc.

Those of you who have lived their whole lives in Oklahoma know how prejudiced many people in our own state are. It's unfortunate.

[Luke]

It has been thoroughly reported by Newsweek, Time, AP and others going back to September.

Links?

[soonerguru]

I'd say correlation doesn't equal causation, but you haven't even established a correlation. Different people have done different things in response to different events and for different reasons.

Uttering the magical combination of words "right wing" doesn't magically tie them all together with a bow as you imply.

Who cares? I'm not trying to make a legal case or dissertation. I do have powers of perception, and through my job, I am constantly speaking to folks of all walks of life from throughout the state.

Many of them are watching Glenn Beck, and many of them are gun-toting bigots.

Tell me, if they're not "right wing" what, exactly, would you call them? They may not know much about the way the world works but they sure know they hate liberals. It's actually quite comical.

They're also deeply intellectually dishonest, and extremely bitter about the election. They're pissed about the bailouts but think we should let the bankers off the hook? They're pissed about deficits, but advocate cutting spending during a near Depression?

What the FU%&?

[soonerguru]

Links?

Google is your friend. You will be inundated with links. I don't see why I should have to provide this to you when it's been widely reported for months on end.

Do you limit your news to FOX?

[Luke]

Google is your friend. You will be inundated with links. I don't see why I should have to provide this to you when it's been widely reported for months on end.

Do you limit your news to FOX?

LOL

I don't even get Fox News.

I'm for freedom.

They're pissed about the bailouts but think we should let the bankers off the hook? They're pissed about deficits, but advocate cutting spending during a near Depression?

Are you purporting that the above reasons aren't valid reasons to be disturbed with the state of our government?

[soonerguru]

1. On one hand, they favor all the deregulation that made it possible for the banks to deeply screw us in painful ways. Then they get pissed when we bail the crooks out -- not to bail them out, but keep our own asses out of the fire.

2. Herbert Hoover tried to cut spending during a Depression. Bad idea.

One more thing. WHERE WERE THESE PEOPLE WHEN BUSH BLEW UP THE DEBT FROM 1 Trillion to 12 Trillion? WHERE WERE THEY?

They were out staging pro-Iraq War rallies for Bush or something, or playing canasta, because they didn't give a sh#^ about spending or deficits when the NON OBAMA was running the country.

[Midtowner]

Who cares? I'm not trying to make a legal case or dissertation. I do have powers of perception, and through my job, I am constantly speaking to folks of all walks of life from throughout the state.

Gosh, so you should pretty much be able to say whatever you want and not expect anyone to call into question the validity of your proclamations? Neato.

Many of them are watching Glenn Beck, and many of them are gun-toting bigots.

Three things here...

Glenn Beck listeners
Gun toters
Bigots

I could draw you a nice little Venn diagram with these points to illustrate in big 'ol colorful graphics that what you just described are three distinct characteristics. Is there sometimes overlap? Yeah, sometimes. Is there always overlap? No, not really. When carrying on about bigots, best not to cast stones.. glass house.. etc.

Tell me, if they're not "right wing" what, exactly, would you call them?

First, I'd need to be able to define the "them" in your sentence because I do not know precisely who this "they" you are referring to is. Are we talking about the church shooter? (clearly a gun toter) Or are we talking about the folks who show up at rallies with racist signs (bigots)? Or are we talking about the guys who show up to churches while listening to Glenn Beck, carrying racist banners, shooting the place up? I'm confused now.

They may not know much about the way the world works but they sure know they hate liberals. It's actually quite comical.

They're also deeply intellectually dishonest, and extremely bitter about the election. They're pissed about the bailouts but think we should let the bankers off the hook? They're pissed about deficits, but advocate cutting spending during a near Depression?

Generalities will get you nowhere....

But as far as being pissed about deficits, Glenn Beck and the conservative talkie choir was carrying on about deficits and big government during the Bush term. The shows were quite adamant about it, used the terms 'neo-con' and 'RINO' quite liberally, and were generally incensed. But to try to compare what Bush did -- bailout the economy with what Obama is doing -- bailout the economy while starting trillions of dollars worth of government programs which there is no money for is patent intellectual dishonesty. Do better.

What the FU%&?

You betcha.

[Midtowner]

1. On one hand, they favor all the deregulation that made it possible for the banks to deeply screw us in painful ways. Then they get pissed when we bail the crooks out -- not to bail them out, but keep our own asses out of the fire.

That is a really terrific strawman.

It's unfortunate that we can't even get to a legitimate political issue since you can't seem to construct a single logically valid argument. You just want to libel this group of people and proclaim guilt by association. In some cases, they probably ought to be locked up. In other cases, they're ignorant and misled. In still others? They're well read, thinking people who have considered all of the evidence before them and upon applying that evidence to their values, beliefs, etc., have reached a different conclusion than you have as to what is right and what is wrong.

Believe it or not, there are alternate viewpoints to yours which are perfectly legitimate.

[soonerguru]

But to try to compare what Bush did -- bailout the economy with what Obama is doing -- bailout the economy while starting trillions of dollars worth of government programs which there is no money for is patent intellectual dishonesty. Do better.

Exactly what did Bush do to "bail out the economy?" Bush bailed out about the time the economy went into the ****ter.

That is a really terrific strawman.

So you're suggesting there's no cognitive dissonance between, on one hand, lauding the deregulation that lets investment banks do what they will with our money, and on the other hand, getting angry at bailing out the banks? I find it stunning.

The bailout was not about rewarding banks, it was about keeping our entire financial system from shutting down.

Frankly, I'm mad at the banks, too.

But as far as being pissed about deficits, Glenn Beck and the conservative talkie choir was carrying on about deficits and big government during the Bush term.

Wow. That's a revelation. I distinctly remember George Will, Greenspan, the entire Bush economic team, and their enablers on FOX News roundtables discussing how the deficit was irrelevant because it was a small percentage of our GDP. I also remember the suggestion that the four straight quarters of near-zero interest pump-priming was problematic was economically naive. I admit, I can't speak for all of Glenn Beck's programming, as I'm not a regular viewer.

First, I'd need to be able to define the "them" in your sentence because I do not know precisely who this "they" you are referring to is. Are we talking about the church shooter? (clearly a gun toter) Or are we talking about the folks who show up at rallies with racist signs (bigots)? Or are we talking about the guys who show up to churches while listening to Glenn Beck, carrying racist banners, shooting the place up? I'm confused now.

No one is suggesting that all of the tea baggers are gun-toting racists. In fact, the connection to racists on this thread was initially promoted more by the teabagger defenders.

The suggestion was made that critics of teabaggers claim every Obama hater is racist. While that is far from true, it is clear that there has been an outbreak of right wing violence and hate group activity since the election. How is this confusing? It isn't, unless you want to engage message-board sophistry.

The bottom line is that the FOX-staged tea parties lacked coherence. Were there bigots there? Sure. Was Joe the Plumber involved? Check. Were there legitimate libertarian intellectuals to be found? A handful.

But what ideas were actually promoted? It was such a mish-mash no one, including yourself, can really say what they stand for.

But damn, they're sure angry.

[Midtowner]

Exactly what did Bush do to "bail out the economy?" Bush bailed out about the time the economy went into the ****ter.

You might want to check, but it was Bush who signed off on the first round of stimulus cash meant for the failing banks.

So you're suggesting there's no cognitive dissonance between, on one hand, lauding the deregulation that lets investment banks do what they will with our money, and on the other hand, getting angry at bailing out the banks? I find it stunning.

Maybe for some, but others have been adamant that we should have let everything collapse. Yes, a lot of wealth would have been destroyed, but just like a regular person emerging from bankruptcy, we'd be stronger for it in the end.

The bailout was not about rewarding banks, it was about keeping our entire financial system from shutting down.

Maybe it needed to shut down? Its model was obviously flawed, and now it is even more flawed now that the risk vs. reward calculus has been completely altered.

It may have taken a few years, and those might have been painful years, but we'd have eventually come out. Some fortunes would be lost, but others would have been made. Who is to know which is better?

Wow. That's a revelation. I distinctly remember George Will, Greenspan, the entire Bush economic team, and their enablers on FOX News roundtables discussing how the deficit was irrelevant because it was a small percentage of our GDP. I also remember the suggestion that the four straight quarters of near-zero interest pump-priming was problematic was economically naive. I admit, I can't speak for all of Glenn Beck's programming, as I'm not a regular viewer.

Well, that was then, and now our current administration has proposed vast new deficits and has further proposed to expand at a level never before conceived. Ever hear the phrase "trillion is the new billion?"

Personally, I stand to gain from stagflation as my student loans are pretty huge. Hopefully, someday, I can toss the cash I made from an hour of billable time into a wheelbarrow, push that sucker down to the OSLA and fork the money over.

No one is suggesting that all of the tea baggers are gun-toting racists. In fact, the connection to racists on this thread was initially promoted more by the teabagger defenders.

That was me and I said that no doubt there'd be some nuts in the crowd, but that was not a valid reason to play the guilt by association game.

The suggestion was made that critics of teabaggers claim every Obama hater is racist.

Some do... Janeane Gerafalo has said precisely that. Surely she isn't alone. Isn't she considered an opinion leader by some?

While that is far from true, it is clear that there has been an outbreak of right wing violence and hate group activity since the election. How is this confusing? It isn't, unless you want to engage message-board sophistry.

No more so than before really. It's just that the media is covering it differently now because it can play the 'fun with storylines' game, ginning things up for ratings.

The bottom line is that the FOX-staged tea parties lacked coherence. Were there bigots there? Sure. Was Joe the Plumber involved? Check. Were there legitimate libertarian intellectuals to be found? A handful.

But what ideas were actually promoted? It was such a mish-mash no one, including yourself, can really say what they stand for.

But damn, they're sure angry.

Agreed. Just a bunch of disaffected people lashing out. I see no threat here. May the best ideas carry the next election cycle.

[Luke]

One more thing. WHERE WERE THESE PEOPLE WHEN BUSH BLEW UP THE DEBT FROM 1 Trillion to 12 Trillion? WHERE WERE THEY?

Were you upset when Bush did this? And are you upset the Obama continues the trend?

[Al Gerhart]

First off, thanks to those that are tolerant enough to defend freedom of speech and the right to assembly.

I read three consistent themes in the negative comments, that the Tea Parties are racist, that they are republican contructs, and the use of the term "tea bagger". I don't expect to convince those posters that are bashing the event, but I can show massive Hypocrisy in their arguements.

The first, repeated charges of racism, is easily dealt with. We had 5 speakers, two were black, including our moderator. While writing this, we watched several TV stations broadcast footage of one of our black speakers speaking. Need I say more? Or will they now attack these two speakers as well?

Second, the canard that these Tea Parties are republican constucts. No, most of us are dismayed at Bush's bailout, and dismayed with our republican elected officials that initially voted with Bush's bailout. Many independents, including myself, were lulled into sticking with Bush because he kept us safe, when looking back many of his "compassionate conservative" ideals did not meet constitutional tests. I can tell you that the Tea Party movement has dealt with infiltration, both republican and democrat. It happens, it also happens that the attempts are literally crushed most of the time, with the few successful take over cases withering as their members realize what has happened.

On this point, I'm going to digress. Oklahoman's know that KTOK news 1000 radio's Mark Shannon did NOT support this OKC Tea Party. Those of us in the loop know why, he received an email on Thursday from a well connected republican big wig, attacking our group as being anti republican. My point is that when we find ourselves attacked by both republican and democrat, we must be in the middle and we must be rattling the right cages. Many, not all, of us understand that the republicans just gained control of the state after decades of democratic rule. We are willing to give the handful of republicans that are known for constitutional views the benefit of the doubt for now, even are willing to get behind the few canidates willing to push the libertarian/constitutionalist ideas. Lord help em if they go back on their word...

And thirdly, the continued use of "tea bagging" as an insult. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that "tea bagging" refers to a gay sexual practice. Since it is obviously hurled as an insult, doesn't it also show obvious contempt for the gay community or their practices? How is it that one can hurl slurs at the gay community in this manner and retain any claim to decency? We had several supporters from the gay community, I doubt they would appreciate the hate speech.

Bottom line, we got great press, about 4,000 to 5,000 attendees, and one right wing nut job who quickly realized that the crowd did not agree with his rants.

Again, I don't expect to convience the haters, but I don't want to allow their hypocrisy to stand without comment. Those resorting to slurs and half truths always do so when they have no valid arguements, such it has been from the beginning of time and so it will continue to be.

[Thunder]

I love it when I saw on the news someone holding a sign, "WE THE PEOPLE CAN FIRE YOU," and I definately hope that image have some sort of a powerful effect.

[Bostonfan]

First off, thanks to those that are tolerant enough to defend freedom of speech and the right to assembly.

I read three consistent themes in the negative comments, that the Tea Parties are racist, that they are republican contructs, and the use of the term "tea bagger". I don't expect to convince those posters that are bashing the event, but I can show massive Hypocrisy in their arguements.

The first, repeated charges of racism, is easily dealt with. We had 5 speakers, two were black, including our moderator. While writing this, we watched several TV stations broadcast footage of one of our black speakers speaking. Need I say more? Or will they now attack these two speakers as well?

Second, the canard that these Tea Parties are republican constucts. No, most of us are dismayed at Bush's bailout, and dismayed with our republican elected officials that initially voted with Bush's bailout. Many independents, including myself, were lulled into sticking with Bush because he kept us safe, when looking back many of his "compassionate conservative" ideals did not meet constitutional tests. I can tell you that the Tea Party movement has dealt with infiltration, both republican and democrat. It happens, it also happens that the attempts are literally crushed most of the time, with the few successful take over cases withering as their members realize what has happened.

On this point, I'm going to digress. Oklahoman's know that KTOK news 1000 radio's Mark Shannon did NOT support this OKC Tea Party. Those of us in the loop know why, he received an email on Thursday from a well connected republican big wig, attacking our group as being anti republican. My point is that when we find ourselves attacked by both republican and democrat, we must be in the middle and we must be rattling the right cages. Many, not all, of us understand that the republicans just gained control of the state after decades of democratic rule. We are willing to give the handful of republicans that are known for constitutional views the benefit of the doubt for now, even are willing to get behind the few canidates willing to push the libertarian/constitutionalist ideas. Lord help em if they go back on their word...

And thirdly, the continued use of "tea bagging" as an insult. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that "tea bagging" refers to a gay sexual practice. Since it is obviously hurled as an insult, doesn't it also show obvious contempt for the gay community or their practices? How is it that one can hurl slurs at the gay community in this manner and retain any claim to decency? We had several supporters from the gay community, I doubt they would appreciate the hate speech.

Bottom line, we got great press, about 4,000 to 5,000 attendees, and one right wing nut job who quickly realized that the crowd did not agree with his rants.

Again, I don't expect to convience the haters, but I don't want to allow their hypocrisy to stand without comment. Those resorting to slurs and half truths always do so when they have no valid arguements, such it has been from the beginning of time and so it will continue to be.

What was accomplished at this event?

[Luke]

First off, thanks to those that are tolerant enough to defend freedom of speech and the right to assembly.

I read three consistent themes in the negative comments, that the Tea Parties are racist, that they are republican contructs, and the use of the term "tea bagger". I don't expect to convince those posters that are bashing the event, but I can show massive Hypocrisy in their arguements.

The first, repeated charges of racism, is easily dealt with. We had 5 speakers, two were black, including our moderator. While writing this, we watched several TV stations broadcast footage of one of our black speakers speaking. Need I say more? Or will they now attack these two speakers as well?

Second, the canard that these Tea Parties are republican constucts. No, most of us are dismayed at Bush's bailout, and dismayed with our republican elected officials that initially voted with Bush's bailout. Many independents, including myself, were lulled into sticking with Bush because he kept us safe, when looking back many of his "compassionate conservative" ideals did not meet constitutional tests. I can tell you that the Tea Party movement has dealt with infiltration, both republican and democrat. It happens, it also happens that the attempts are literally crushed most of the time, with the few successful take over cases withering as their members realize what has happened.

On this point, I'm going to digress. Oklahoman's know that KTOK news 1000 radio's Mark Shannon did NOT support this OKC Tea Party. Those of us in the loop know why, he received an email on Thursday from a well connected republican big wig, attacking our group as being anti republican. My point is that when we find ourselves attacked by both republican and democrat, we must be in the middle and we must be rattling the right cages. Many, not all, of us understand that the republicans just gained control of the state after decades of democratic rule. We are willing to give the handful of republicans that are known for constitutional views the benefit of the doubt for now, even are willing to get behind the few canidates willing to push the libertarian/constitutionalist ideas. Lord help em if they go back on their word...

And thirdly, the continued use of "tea bagging" as an insult. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that "tea bagging" refers to a gay sexual practice. Since it is obviously hurled as an insult, doesn't it also show obvious contempt for the gay community or their practices? How is it that one can hurl slurs at the gay community in this manner and retain any claim to decency? We had several supporters from the gay community, I doubt they would appreciate the hate speech.

Bottom line, we got great press, about 4,000 to 5,000 attendees, and one right wing nut job who quickly realized that the crowd did not agree with his rants.

Again, I don't expect to convience the haters, but I don't want to allow their hypocrisy to stand without comment. Those resorting to slurs and half truths always do so when they have no valid arguements, such it has been from the beginning of time and so it will continue to be.

Thanks for the report.

I'm pleased to have another libertarian/costitutional minded citizen on board.

Welcome.

[kevinpate]

> What was accomplished at this event?

A mere guess on my part - some people felt very warm fuzzies, some people just enjoyed feling sort of every day, somewhat normal fuzzies, some got their fuzzies in a bunch and some went home feeling like they got cold water tossed on their fuzzies, notwithstanding the weather.

In short, not much.

[Luke]

What was accomplished at Pride Day?

[Easy180]

What was accomplished at Pride Day?

New fashion tips for one

[dismayed]

I'd say correlation doesn't equal causation

This is going to take us off on a tangent, but here it goes anyway.... I generally agree with this statement; however, in statistics there is the concept of what is known as the correlation coefficient, basically a value that represents how much two or more unseemingly related pieces of data tend to correlate with one another. Correlation does not equal causation, but it doesn't not equal causation either. I wish research firms would publish this piece of data along with their other statistics.

If anyone knows of any research firms that actually try to keep correlation coefficients I think that would be interesting to read about.

[dismayed]

New fashion tips for one

xD