Richardson Tea Party

I went to the Richard­son Tea Party yes­ter­day and it was pretty inter­est­ing. The crowd looked like it was around 700 or so which is pretty good for a lunch day protest rally. We weren’t cen­tered in one place like in other tea par­ties around the coun­try. Most every­one was walk­ing around the park wav­ing at cars. There was lots of sup­port­ive honk­ing and only one idiot woman who flipped us off. There were all dif­fer­ent types of peo­ple there as you can see from the pic­tures below.

I feel like there is def­i­nitely some­thing brew­ing with this move­ment. Here’s hop­ing any­way. Instapun­dit has lots more cov­er­age and pic­tures includ­ing one from Dallas.

dsc_0022

dsc_0030dsc_0031dsc_0059dsc_0048dsc_0061dsc_0050dsc_0068dsc_0077

8 Comments

  • Nice. It’s good to finally see peo­ple tak­ing a stand.

  • it is good to see this. i just wish they didn’t end up look­ing igno­rant in the process. seri­ously, tea party? those of us who paid atten­tion in amer­i­can his­tory class remem­ber that the boston tea party had noth­ing to do with high taxes — in fact, the protested tea act had low­ered the effec­tive tax on tea. tax­a­tion with­out rep­re­sen­ta­tion was the name of the game, some­thing none of these folks can claim with­out becom­ing hyp­ocrites for telling me i should move back to canada if i didn’t like bush’s poli­cies. love it or leave it, remem­ber? sup­port your pres­i­dent no mat­ter what in times of crisis?

    the unfor­tu­nate fact of the mat­ter is that in look­ing at these pic­tures i see a remark­able dearth of any­one who didn’t vote repub­li­can (though if by ‘all dif­fer­ent types of peo­ple’ you mean middle-aged and older middle-class white folks i can see your point), which sug­gests that this has less to do with a groundswell of sup­port for a third party and more to do with just being unhappy with democ­rats. while i can sym­pa­thize with that, it gives me no hope for change. the moment mr. obama is replaced it will be with another neo­con who low­ers taxes but spends like a meth addict with his mom’s credit card who feels he deserves the very best stereos to dis­as­sem­ble on the white house lawn while he fig­ures out another way to end around my con­sti­tu­tional rights to pri­vacy, free­dom of reli­gion, and what­ever other bits and pieces he can come up with to advance his dis­torted social agenda.

    but that’s just me — i’m a bit of a pes­simist. i thought the bailouts were a bad idea back when they were some­thing bush cooked up.

  • for the record, i’m aware that you thought they were a bad idea from the start as well, my man. i’m presently near­ing the end of maybe my worst night’s sleep of all time. that makes me cranky.

  • Scotch Drinker wrote:

    First of all, call­ing a bunch of peo­ple you don’t know igno­rant based on their atten­dance at an event, espe­cially on someone’s blog who was in that same atten­dance doesn’t exactly make you look like a rea­soned indi­vid­ual who just hap­pens to dis­agree. It looks a lot like an ad hominem to me and isn’t par­tic­u­larly use­ful for the dis­cus­sion at hand. Sec­ond, say­ing the Boston Tea Party was only about tax­a­tion with­out rep­re­sen­ta­tion is like say­ing World War I was only about the assas­si­na­tion of Arch­duke Franz Fer­di­nand. Tax­a­tion with­out rep­re­sen­ta­tion was a key fac­tor but there were many more fac­tors that led to the Boston Tea Party. And even if it was only about tax­a­tion with­out rep­re­sen­ta­tion, if you truly think that you are well rep­re­sented by our rul­ing class, you have a dif­fer­ent view on them than I’ll ever have.

    Finally, your keen abil­ity to ascer­tain how peo­ple voted just by look­ing at some pic­tures is extra­or­di­nary. ACORN prob­a­bly has a high pay­ing con­sul­tant job they’d love to give you. What I meant by all dif­fer­ent types was cow­boys, bik­ers, old peo­ple, young peo­ple, sec­ond amend­ment peo­ple, abol­ish the fed peo­ple, fed­er­al­ist peo­ple, fair tax peo­ple and more. I didn’t say any­thing about diver­sity and given the fact that the protest hap­pened in white­bread Richard­son, that shouldn’t exactly sur­prise you.

    Whether this is the begin­ning of a third party will only be decided with time. Maybe it’s not. How­ever, back in 1994, the Amer­i­can elec­torate threw out a whole bunch of politi­cians because they were angry for being lied to. Our politi­cians have been lying to us for a long time now and I think this very well could be the tip of the ice­berg. Say­ing hun­dreds of thou­sands of peo­ple across the US protest­ing our government’s prof­li­gate spend­ing and ram­pant cor­rup­tion is just more of the same seems worse than pes­simistic. It sounds cynical.

  • ok, first off 4am is never the best time for me to write — i didn’t mean to imply that any­one involved in this IS igno­rant, only that it comes across as such. and i cer­tainly did not to imply my own igno­rance rel­a­tive to the boston tea party’s causes, only that with regard to taxes lack of rep­re­sen­ta­tion was the name of the game, not height of said. lastly, i never sug­gested we are well-represented by our rul­ing class, only that we are, in fact, rep­re­sented by them. qual­ity of rep­re­sen­ta­tion was not even an argu­ment to be had in boston. i sup­pose that’s hair-splitting, but there you are.

    now to the rebut­tals that weren’t based in my own mis­com­mu­ni­ca­tion. to begin with, rel­a­tively speak­ing richard­son is any­thing but white­bread. just drop by the high school that’s a few hun­dred yards from that pick­et­ing site and check the demo­graphic rel­a­tive to that protest and tell me there’s any align­ment there at all. as for how these peo­ple voted, the woman’s ‘read my lip­stick’ shirt is a pretty obvi­ous nod to mrs. palin’s pig defense, and there hasn’t been a leftie who wore that much ‘mer­i­can flag regalia since abby hoff­man. per­haps i’m guilty of sterotyp­ing, but these were not exactly with­out edu­cated prece­dent. and no, you didn’t say any­thing about diver­sity, just ‘all dif­fer­ent types of peo­ple’, so if i’m going to stoop to the insult level of your ACORN ref­er­ence can i infer that minori­ties do not qual­ify as peo­ple? you’re bet­ter than that. besides, your pic­tures don’t show any­one under the age of 50 who wasn’t brought by some­one that age (one notable woman aside, admit­tedly), i see no one who in my expe­ri­ence would qual­ify as a biker (and my dad owned a harley deal­er­ship when i was young), and with­out sub­stan­tial dis­cus­sion i’d wager it’s be tough to deter­mine if any­one in any of your pic­tures is a mem­ber of any of those groups you cite. you chal­lenged us to judge the diver­sity of the turnout based on your pic­tures — that’s all i did. i’m just say­ing it don’t look all that ‘all types’ to me, brother.

    ulti­mately, i hope i’m wrong. i really do. even an old lib­eral like me has mel­lowed with age and come to rec­og­nize that all the demo­c­ra­tic party is is the oppo­site side of the trade-ff coin from the repub­li­cans — with one you lose a bunch of money to main­tain rights, with the other you lose a bunch of rights to hold onto your money. and the dems seem to be get­ting worse. and i don’t think cyn­i­cal is the wrong word at all (secretly, i think that we lib­er­als are more cyn­i­cal than con­ser­v­a­tives in many ways — how else to explain a group of peo­ple who think peo­ple can’t care for them­selves and won’t care for each other with­out gov­ern­men­tal involve­ment?). i’ve just seen too much behav­ior to sug­gest that any­thing will change. 1994 was water­shed, but what has it given us long-term? dickety-doo. in the end, i think with­out a sat­u­ra­tion of alter­na­tive par­ties it’s not going to work out well, unless a true lib­er­tar­ian party emerges that can stay true to its prin­ci­ples. but even then, will it work? will an amer­i­can pub­lic that is split down the mid­dle between those who want a hand­out and those who want to tell oth­ers how to live their lives really take a gov­ern­ment that will pro­vide for nei­ther? maybe so. but since the price of gas has gone down i have a load of ris­ing SUV sales that sug­gest maybe not.

  • AND after much dis­cus­sion, it turns out that i am appar­ently the only one i know who thinks ‘tea party’ was a goofy name for these — it seems i am alone in my think­ing that it under­mines the point. every­one else i have asked thinks that it’s plenty effec­tive regard­less of fac­tual accu­racy as it points the fin­ger at taxes one way or the other (some­thing i must grudg­ingly admit), so i guess i’ll take that point and suck it for a while!

  • Scotch Drinker wrote:

    Well, this dis­cus­sion has cer­tainly taken on a tone I wasn’t antic­i­pat­ing nor intend­ing. My ACORN com­ment was over the top and I apol­o­gize for that. I thought of it as a joke but real­ize that in real­ity, I look like an ass­hole say­ing that. So mea culpa.

    I have lots of other pic­tures I didn’t post. None that I can see have any true diver­sity in them though they do have most of the types I men­tioned above. I should have posted them though if I was going to use the pic­tures as evi­dence of dif­fer­ent types of people.

    As far as diver­sity is con­cerned, the 2000 Cen­sus says Richard­son is slightly more diverse than Plano but slightly less diverse than Car­roll­ton and far less diverse than Dal­las. The high school pop­u­la­tion prob­a­bly isn’t use­ful in decid­ing diver­sity since there are quite a few things that might influ­ence that one way or the other. I think all the flag regalia could be said to be a sign that it is actu­ally non-partisan. And I would be will­ing to wager a bot­tle of good scotch that if I asked every­one there “Do you sup­port the sec­ond amend­ment?” and “Did you VOTE Repub­li­can in the last elec­tion?” I’d get far more peo­ple say­ing yes to num­ber 1 than to num­ber 2 since, again lean­ing on sta­tis­tics, 50% of the peo­ple there prob­a­bly didn’t vote at all.

    1994 was a water­shed event and I actu­ally think it had a great impact because it showed peo­ple what can actu­ally hap­pen. Our politi­cians go long peri­ods of time with­out any inter­ven­tion from the main­stream until they step over the lines and a huge back­lash occurs. 1994 was a back­lash. I believe we may be see­ing another one now. And if this isn’t one? I have dark the­o­ries about what hap­pens to Amer­i­can civ­i­liza­tion. If we can’t get angry about how we are cur­rently being treated by our polit­i­cal class, all hope may in fact be lost.

    Con­cern­ing the tea par­ties in gen­eral, Ras­mussen put out sur­vey results yes­ter­day that 1 in 4 peo­ple knew some­one who attended one and that 51% of Amer­i­cans had a favor­able view of the tea par­ties includ­ing 54% of Main­stream Democ­rats. Fur­ther sign that there is a HUGE divide between our rul­ing elites and the main­stream, only 32% of the Polit­i­cal Class was fol­low­ing the news on tea par­ties com­pared to 58% of the mainstream.

    With that, I’ll go back to blog­ging on gardening.

  • mea cul­pas are due all around. i fre­quently let my tem­per get the best of me, and once one adds that to a joke of a night’s ‘sleep’ it was my atti­tude (along with a sub­stan­tial lack of clar­ity in com­mu­ni­ca­tion) that kicked off the neg­a­tive tone.

    i AM shocked that richard­son is less diverse than car­roll­ton, hav­ing lived there for sev­eral years, but per­haps it’s merely an issue of per­spec­tive — i now live in mck­in­ney, which makes plano look like all the new york bor­oughs com­bined. i’m not sure i agree on flag regalia, but i’m not sure this is exactly a salient point any­way, and i’m fer dayum sure you’re right on the last point in that para­graph, so screw me again. i’m wrong A LOT.

    i’m thor­oughly intrigued and frankly pleas­antly sur­prised by the ras­mussen results — i think that is extremely encour­ag­ing, and thor­oughly dis­cred­its my ini­tial (totally inad­e­quately expressed) con­cern that you inad­ver­tently pointed to with your sug­ges­tion of ad hominem argu­ment. that is pre­cisely what wor­ried me; the argu­ment didn’t mat­ter because any­one left of cen­ter would look at the crowds and, ad hominem, dis­miss the argu­ment as noth­ing more than sour grapes. these data point not only to that not being a major con­cern, but pos­si­bly of no con­cern whatever.

    i am always open to hav­ing egg on my face, and in this cir­cum­stance i am truly glad to wear it. i’m still not entirely con­vinced that this has any stay­ing power, but even i have to admit that it looks pretty good. let’s hope all the social agenda dif­fer­ences can be ignored for long enough to get this rolling.

Leave a Reply

Your email is never shared.Required fields are marked *