This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Western North Carolina Tea Party Summit in Hickory

TEA PARTY SUMMIT

16 comments:

Liberal POV said...

Tea Party Mob

Send in your $99.00 check today, and these people have learned how to cash in on your anger like Ms Palin and the hate media.

You people are being scammed.

guy faulkes said...

Liberalproverbs18;2, by your comments, we must assume that liberals need no fund raisers. This does carry a certain amount of logic as the lame stream media is in their pocket and they receive favorable publicity under the guise of biased news. Also, it is interesting you continue to oppose those that disagree with you using the political process in an organized manner.

I beleive the word I am looking for to describe you in this case is hypocrite.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

By all means send in your check and buy some tee shirts and buttons when you're there.

Little if any of your money will go to your cause.

This is an old con game.

guy faulkes said...

Thank you fr your advice. I will certainly do so. After all, anything that helps defeat liberals is well worth the money.

Sarkazein said...

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER
Published: May 4, 2010


Among the many reverberations of President Obama’s election, here is one he probably never anticipated: at least 32 African-Americans are running for Congress this year as Republicans, the biggest surge since Reconstruction, according to party officials.///


THE AWAKENING

Wolf's Head said...

$99 for 3 days is a bargain for this. Remember they have to pay to rent the hall they're holding it in.

Bushrod Gentry said...

Here is an off topic question.

Al Gore said that global warming will make the oceans rise over twenty feet. Al Gore just bought a nine million dollar beachfront villa. This begs the question: Why would anyone pay $9,000,000 for a house that will soon be underwater? I wonder if he will spend his Nobel Prize money to purchase new drapes.

Sarkazein said...

Bushrod Gentry-

That is an excellent point.
I HOPE this will be used against him in any upcoming fraud indictments or civil suits.

from Watauga Watch said...

Barack Obama's election and relentless pursuit of health care reform led to the emergence of a new political movement -- the "Tea Party" -- which claims the Obama presidency is reckless and irresponsible in its spending. Their evidence is quite limited and includes the new health care law, priced at $940 billion over 10 years, or $94 billion per year. Never mind the fact that the costs of the health care law are paid for without adding a penny to the national debt.

What I'd like to know from any "Tea Party" member is ... where were you during the Bush administration? The costs of the war in Iraq are now $721 billion over seven years, or $103 billion per year, more than the health care law. And all of the war costs under President Bush were paid for using emergency appropriations outside of the normal budget process. Thus every penny spent on the Iraq war is added to the national debt!

Perhaps "Tea Party" members see war and health care reform as apples and oranges. I agree. The health care bill pays for itself and helps people, while the war adds to the debt and kills people! Assuming we just ignore the war, though, what about President Bush's Medicare expansion in 2003? This law costs $720 billion over 10 years, or $72 billion per year, and every penny of the costs were added on to the national debt. Yet this did not upset you enough to form a "Tea Party" movement.

And what about the $700 billion bailout of big business by Bush? No "Tea Party" movement for that either (in fact, you guys seem to think it was Obama that organized the bailout!). Yet you attack Obama for the 2009 stimulus plan, priced at $787 billion. Criticisms of the stimulus aside, many economists say it did save our economy from a major depression, and it is even helping expand Highway 421 here in Boone!

Your lack of criticism of President Bush is clear proof that your criticism of President Obama is not rooted in principles such as small government or fiscal responsibility but instead in partisan ideology. In other words, you are out in the streets because Obama is a Democratic president, plain and simple. So spare us the "devotion to the Constitution."

Analysis of White house budget data shows that the three presidents who most added to the national debt were all Republicans, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and George H.W. Bush. Yet neither of the Bush administrations prompted a "Tea Party" movement, and you hold President Reagan up to be this godlike figure who supposedly stood for conservative values such as small government and fiscal responsibility. It is just not true.

Almost nothing the "Tea Party" members say can be taken seriously. I'd laugh out loud if it were not so scary and dangerous. There are thousands of angry and uninformed people who actually believe Obama is a socialist, a communist, a Muslim, a totalitarian dictator, a foreign citizen, and even the anti-Christ who wants the terrorists to win! And they're generating societal unease based on these absurd beliefs.

So I ask you again: Where were you during the Bush administration? And the other Bush administration? And the Reagan administration? And why do you believe these ridiculous things?

Additionally I am curious if you know that your movement is led by lobbyist-run think tanks including "Americans for Prosperity" and "FreedomWorks"? These groups are not about fiscal responsibility or small government. They are for getting Republicans elected, no matter what. It's just politics, plain and simple. Finally, why do you even call yourselves the "Tea Party"? You are citizens, and you have representation! So there's no need to dump tea in the harbor!

Sarkazein said...

from WW- MANY conservatives here and elsewhere complained about President Bush's/Congresses the spending. They still do. The Tea Party is more anti-wasteful spending than anti-Obama.
The Tea party protestors can see a quadrupling of debt and a loss of freedom as getting worse... hence the protests.
You are just flat wrong about conservatives not complaining about President Bush's/Congresses spending. Why do you think Obama won? It is because Conservatives did not come out in mass and support the Republican Party.
Dishonesty would be the Liberals complaining about President Bush's deficit at $400B (which they did) and NOT the Obama/Congresses $1.5 trillion.
deficit.
Conservatives have complained profusely about ALL bail-outs.
Though well written, your comment is false.

Nobody said...

Sorry to do this (for the length), but here is the letter to the editor from the Watauga Democrat -- sounds suspiciously like the post by "from WW." Same author? I report, You decide!

No need to dump tea in the harbor
Editor:
Barack Obama's election and relentless pursuit of health-care reform led to the emergence of a new political movement- the "Tea Party" movement - that claims the Obama presidency is reckless and irresponsible in its spending. Their evidence is quite limited and includes the new health-care law, priced at $940 billion over 10 years, or $94 billion per year (Wall Street Journal).
Never mind the fact that the costs of the health-care law are paid for without adding a penny to the national debt (Congressional Budget Office).
What I'd like to know from any "Tea Party" member is where were you during the Bush administration? The costs of the war in Iraq are now $721 billion over seven years, or $103 billion per year, more than the health-care law (Costs of War). And all of the war costs under President Bush were paid for using emergency appropriations outside of the normal budget process (Iraq Study Group).
Thus, every penny spent on the Iraq war is added to the national debt!
Perhaps "Tea Party" members see war and health-care reform as apples and oranges. I agree (the health-care bill pays for itself and helps people, while the war adds to the debt and kills people!).

Nobody said...

Letter, cont.

Assuming we just ignore the war, though, what about President Bush's Medicare expansion in 2003? This law costs $720 billion over 10 years, or $72 billion per year, and every penny of the costs were added on to the national debt (Fox News).
Yet, this did not upset you enough to form a "Tea Party" movement.
And what about the $700 billion bailout of big business by Bush (BBC)?
No "Tea Party" movement for that either (in fact you guys seem to think it was Obama that organized the bailout)! Yet, you attack Obama for the 2009 stimulus plan, priced at $787 billion. Criticisms of the stimulus aside, economists say it did save our economy from a major depression (NPR), and it is even helping expand U.S. 421 here in Boone!
Your lack of criticism of President Bush is clear proof that your criticism of President Obama is not rooted in principles such as small government or fiscal responsibility, but instead in partisan ideology. In other words, you are out in the streets because Obama is a Democratic president, plain and simple. So spare us the histrionics.
An analysis of White house budget data shows that three presidents who most added to the national debt are George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and George H.W. Bush, all Republicans (White House budget data). Yet, neither of the Bush administrations led to a "Tea Party" movement, and you hold President Reagan up to be this godlike figure who supposedly stood for conservative values, such as small government and fiscal responsibility. It is just not true.
Almost nothing the "Tea Party" members say can be taken seriously.
I'd laugh out loud if it were not so scary and dangerous. There are thousands of angry and uniformed people who actually believe Obama is a socialist, communist, Muslim, totalitarian dictator, foreign citizen, and even the anti-Christ who wants the terrorists to win (Politico)!
And they're generating societal unease based on these absurd beliefs.
So, I ask you again, where were you during the Bush administration? And the other Bush administration? And the Reagan administration? And why do you believe these ridiculous things?
Additionally, I am curious if you know that your movement is led by lobbyist-run think tanks, including "Americans for Prosperity" and "FreedomWorks?" These groups are not about fiscal responsibility or small government, but are for getting Republicans elected, no matter what. It's just politics, plain and simple.
Finally, why do you even call yourselves the "Tea Party?" You are a citizen and you have representation! So, there's no need to dump tea in the harbor!
Matthew Robinson
Unaffiliated voter

from Watauga Watch said...

Hey Nobody

The letter was in the Democrat but it was also on Watauga Watch first. I just pasted it from there to see if there were comments here.

Hey Sarkezian, good points. But you neglected one important fact. Bush inherited a record surplus and turned it into a record deficit. Obama inherited a record deficit and it has gotten worse (he says it was necessary to add to it through the stimulus to save the economy). Whether you agree with that last part or not aside, the Tea Party folks did not rise up when Bush spent so much so I think the original article is correct on that point.

Sarkazein said...

So From WW, are you thinking the Tea Party is illegitimate because it did not start in the exact moment in history you think it should have?
There is "the straw that broke the camel's back" after-all. President Bush's deficit is one of the straws, Obama increasing the load 4X was the straw. There is a point, in other-words, where too much is too much.

I will never forget liberals complaining about President Bush's/Congress' deficits. I will never forget the same liberals NOT complaining about the 4X increase by Obama/Congress. THAT is the epitome of dishonest debate.

from Watauga Watch said...

Sarkazein

Yes I thought of that (this is the final straw). But then I am also aware that the Tea Party movement is not a spontaneous grassroots uprising, but instead is a corporate sponsored one. So I see all those folks out there as tools of the powerful.

I don't recall people protesting Bush's spending. I just recall them protesting his stupid war.

Sarkazein said...

From WW- Most of the time, middle America does not protest. Usually, only Lefties protest in the streets. This may be why you didn't see people "protesting" President Bush's/Congress' over-spending.

I don't agree with your evil corporation theory about the Tea Party movement, but who do you think owns corporations? PEOPLE.

Why do you think Obama is continuing Bush's war and even escalating it in Pakistan. IS WAR NOW THE ANSWER?