When you first heard of the Tea Party, who did you think belonged?

After OmSigDAVID, Finn d'Abuzz is the second person I thought of when I first heard about the Tea Party.

Why, because the answer didn't join with what you first thought when hearing of The Tea Party? Or because now, a few years into their being, I am not saying I immediately knew there went that they were the bad guys.

You asked,


I told you.


I may have over stated it; but, to me, Tea Party conjures up images of the original tea party and protesting; which I usually associate with liberal Democrats, not with Republicans. Republicans are usually sit down dinner types and rallies. Can you honestly picture the average Republican lifting a crate of tea in protest against something and hurling it into the bay? Tea Party by name still makes me think of protesters, both the original tea party in the 1700s and additionally the young people of the 1960s (of which I was 1) and their demonstrations against war and various other things including "the establishment" (I was not involved in those protests, they were not as meaningful or as necessary to me as civil rights for minorities and legal rights for homosexuals. I understood where they were coming from...the anti-war protesters, just didn't take part). So to me, I heard Tea Party and I thought protesters and I thought Democrats and I thought far to the left liberal. I still take seconds a few to associate them with who the current Tea Party as a political force is.


In your thread (your opening statement) you said




to which I responded


I bolded and italicized above my main point, I think of tea party attenders as those who would push for the arts, not reduce them.

If my statement at the beginning about tertiary streets being plowed is what was confusing, then my apologies, I still have occasions where I start to write something and it isn't what I expected 2 thoughts or words in my brain at the same time and one gets typed up), same as how I still occasionally get my words mixed up, out of order. That really doesn't matter since, the main point that was being given to you (again, I bolded it above) was there and that seems to be what truly offends you since it didn't agree with your thoughts.

Here's a thread that with 41 replies is, arguably, "Popular."

Look at the content and then consider the definition of "Popular?"

Do you think all this kvetching is going to change things?

U r admirably thorough!





David

Why do I think sturgis is confused?

BEcause he wrote this:

plainoldme, are you really this incredibly obtuse? You asked what I thought when I first heard of the Tea Party, who did I think belonged to it. I told you.

Now let's go back. You decided to pronounce me as 'confused' earlier in the thread, now you are using my second post and deciding to point at the idea of me being confused as an element of that post. In fairness to me, you didn't even have the decency to show my entire statement. Not to fret, I have it here. I have highlighted in color other than black, to show what you intentionally left out in an effort to make yourself appear right.

Original statement by me (as response to your saying, 'you seem confused.'):

Or am I labeled by you as being confused, because I didn't immediately know who or what they were? (I bolded and italicized above that set of words for you ).

Maybe some knew, I doubt many knew, and looking back at various boards, that is confirmed. I stay by my statement that my first thought was that they were liberals and Democrats, because as I indicated that is who I normally think of when thinking of demonstrations, which is what the original tea party of the 1700s was.

I find it highly unlikely that when the words 'tea party' were first uttered on the news or in a news print that you knew precisely what they were. Few if any really did, not from just the name of the organization. If you did, then you would be saying that when little children have their pretend tea parties, your delusional brain believes they are all sitting their with their imaginary tea, discussing cutting funding for schools and programs and cutting taxes for the wealthy.

Or are you still irked that after your opening statement and how you associated tea party with funding cuts to music and the such, that I stated my thought towards tea parties occurring at the adult level as being wealthy ladies discussing keeping those things going along with ballet, museum and other cultural events. That of course flew in the face of your hate filled rant against the right, so best label the person who points things out as being confused.

So if it helps you feel better by calling me confused then by all means go for it.

No. Just expressing opinions.

It's a challenge at times.