Tea Party: Don’t Let Renters Vote

[Jeton]

Tea Party: Don’t Let Renters Vote - CBS MoneyWatch.com


Tea Party: Don’t Let Renters Vote

By Ilyce Glink | Dec 1, 2010

Nearly two years to go until the next Presdential Election and already the Tea Party is deciding how to slice and dice voters.

Here’s a new Tea Party plank: Don’t let renters vote.

Gawker reported that Judson Phillips, president of prominent Tea Party group Tea Party Nation, has a terrific idea: “The Founding Fathers… put certain restrictions on… the right to vote… you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense.”

Here’s the full quote, from Tea Party Nation Radio:

“The Founding Fathers originally said, they put certain restrictions on who gets the right to vote. It wasn’t you were just a citizen and you got to vote. Some of the restrictions, you know, you obviously would not think about today. But one of those was you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense, because if you’re a property owner you actually have a vested stake in the community. If you’re not a property owner, you know, I’m sorry but property owners have a little bit more of a vested interest in the community than non-property owners.”

Republicans have always had a fondness for the past. But, do we really want to jump right back to the Middle Ages?

 

[james2012]

Nice try. The Tea Party did not say this - some idiot in the Tea Party did. Hmm, I wonder if anyone on the left has ever said anything stupid. Too bad I don't own a server with a terabyte of storage to chronicle just 1% of it. Given the shooting in AZ and this little hit piece by Jeton I could not have said it better than Reagan:

We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.

The same is true for groups of people and their beliefs. I think the property guy is an idiot. What is property? I rent, but I own stocks. This gives me a vested interest. Finding the biggest idiot and propping them up as the poster child for an entire movement is rather pathetic in my book and smacks of desperation and is perhaps a little neurotic to boot.

Tea Party: Don’t Let Renters Vote - CBS MoneyWatch.com


Tea Party: Don’t Let Renters Vote

By Ilyce Glink | Dec 1, 2010

Nearly two years to go until the next Presdential Election and already the Tea Party is deciding how to slice and dice voters.

Here’s a new Tea Party plank: Don’t let renters vote.

Gawker reported that Judson Phillips, president of prominent Tea Party group Tea Party Nation, has a terrific idea: “The Founding Fathers… put certain restrictions on… the right to vote… you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense.”

Here’s the full quote, from Tea Party Nation Radio:

“The Founding Fathers originally said, they put certain restrictions on who gets the right to vote. It wasn’t you were just a citizen and you got to vote. Some of the restrictions, you know, you obviously would not think about today. But one of those was you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense, because if you’re a property owner you actually have a vested stake in the community. If you’re not a property owner, you know, I’m sorry but property owners have a little bit more of a vested interest in the community than non-property owners.”

Republicans have always had a fondness for the past. But, do we really want to jump right back to the Middle Ages?

 

[Jeton]

Nice try. The Tea Party did not say this - some idiot in the Tea Party did. Hmm, I wonder if anyone on the left has ever said anything stupid. Too bad I don't own a server with a terabyte of storage to chronicle just 1% of it. Given the shooting in AZ and this little hit piece by Jeton I could not have said it better than Reagan:



The same is true for groups of people and their beliefs. I think the property guy is an idiot. What is property? I rent, but I own stocks. This gives me a vested interest. Finding the biggest idiot and propping them up as the poster child for an entire movement is rather pathetic in my book and smacks of desperation and is perhaps a little neurotic to boot.

[)] u really don't get that ON THIS SITE u r permanently unable to use the words "desperation" and "neurotic" when referring to anyone but urself, right?[)]

as for ME propping up this Tea Party idiot, there's no need at all...HE'S ALREADY PROPPED UP BY THE "PROMINENT" TEA PARTY GROUPS THAT HE HEADS.

u get a 3/10, n only bcuz u used a bit of equivocation n didn't totally fuck up the Reagan quote.

after all the wildly nutty shit u've posted on this board, would u like to pretend that u've never intentionally pointed out the idiocy of INDIVIDUAL lefties?

opcorn:

 

[james2012]

Wrong again Sherlock. Tea Party Nation members I know - and I know a lot of them - don't like what he said. He has the right to say it, but they disagree. Whether they will push him out remains to be seen but the Tea Party in general does not punish people for holding opinions unless they are habitual idiots who hurt the movement. Then they are put out to pasture. You also have no idea what his stake is in TPN or what he could do if they attempt to push him out. Lawsuits are something most groups avoid unless it becomes apparent that not taking action will be more costly than taking action. As you don't have all the facts it is rather self-serving of you to state he is being propped up by the entire TPN group. My experience with these people tells a very different story.

It must suck to be wrong so often.

[)] u really don't get that ON THIS SITE u r permanently unable to use the words "desperation" and "neurotic" when referring to anyone but urself, right?[)]

as for ME propping up this Tea Party idiot, there's no need at all...HE'S ALREADY PROPPED UP BY THE "PROMINENT" TEA PARTY GROUPS THAT HE HEADS.

u get a 3/10, n only bcuz u used a bit of equivocation n didn't totally fuck up the Reagan quote.

after all the wildly nutty shit u've posted on this board, would u like to pretend that u've never intentionally pointed out the idiocy of INDIVIDUAL lefties?

opcorn:

 

[2yung4this]

Im pretty sure that as a Leader for this particular group, any thing he says can be said to have come from, and supported by the group he leads. If the members of his group dont like what he said they should publicly denounce it.

And as an aside...If the Tea Party wants to be a viable voice in political discourse they really should form a unified party stating their goals and what not, and have a delegated leader. It would be much easier we could have once person as the head piece ya know?

 

[james2012]

Im pretty sure that as a Leader for this particular group, any thing he says can be said to have come from, and supported by the group he leads. If the members of his group dont like what he said they should publicly denounce it.

And as an aside...If the Tea Party wants to be a viable voice in political discourse they really should form a unified party stating their goals and what not, and have a delegated leader. It would be much easier we could have once person as the head piece ya know?

Your preaching to the choir here. I tried for months to get TPP and TPE to quit bickering with each other. Decentralization is the model all of them wish to follow with little or no central control. This makes them powerful as a movement and, since all politics is - usually - local, it makes them powerful locally. Nationally they can be galvanized by a common goal as the last election proved, but it was their message that resonated not just with fellow members but with unaffiliated independents. Fiscal discipline is the order of the day. Socialism is out. If the GOP does not bend to the will of the people - note I am not saying the Tea Parties but the people of this country who spoke in the last election - then they will suffer the same dramatic losses as the Dems did in this previous election. Third party is already being floated around. I think its time.

The liberals are fed up with the Dems and the conservatives are fed up with the Republicans. I see third parties on the horizon - one for each side. The divide will become greater which is good for conservatives as most people identify themselves as conservative than liberal.