Where are the Tea Parties of the Left?

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

A partial answer is provided by the New Republic. The grassroots movement of the Left is presently cooling its heels in “party headquarters inside a putty brown stucco building south of the Capitol.” Lydia DePillis writes of the rise and fall of Obama’s grassroots. “It wasn’t supposed to be this way.” But in the process of telling the story of Obama’s grassroots, she lets the most interesting fact of all out the bag. All the strings were being pulled from the top. The words are those of DePillis....

Previous presidents had outsourced their activism to interest groups; Obama was going to create his own. OFA was supposed to be a new kind of permanent campaign: a grassroots network wielding some 13 million email addresses to mobilize former volunteers on behalf of the administration’s agenda (and keep them engaged for 2012). “We’ve never had a political leader who has continued their organizing while in office like this at this scale,” Tom Matzzie, former Washington director of MoveOn, told NPR in January.

As right-wing protesters dominated the news this summer, it would have seemed the perfect opportunity for Obama’s much-touted organizers to drown out the conservatives with some coordinated agitation of their own. But they barely made a ripple. Where were they? And how could such a formidable grassroots operation–having just put Obama in office–fall quiet so quickly?

The morning after the election, some 10,000 organizers dialed into a conference call with President-elect Obama, who told them that they would be needed for fights to come. But within the Obama camp, there was disagreement about how, exactly, their services ought to be used. OFA could become a freestanding organization that would advocate independently for the president’s agenda. Or it could be folded–along with its formidable fundraising potential–into the Democratic National Committee. Steve Hildebrand, Obama’s deputy campaign manager, favored the independent option: It would allow the group to “pressure anybody who we would need to build a coalition of votes in the House and Senate,” he told the Los Angeles Times in mid-November. David Plouffe, the campaign’s mastermind, disagreed. He had won the election through a precisely directed field operation combined with iron message discipline, and wasn’t about to give it up.

A few days before the inauguration, Obama announced, in effect, that Plouffe’s view had prevailed: Organizing for America would be securely housed within the DNC. (Hildebrand returned to his consulting firm in Sioux Falls, and would later become vocally critical of the administration’s incremental approach to issues such as gay rights. Plouffe stayed on as an adviser, and his firm raked in $376,000 this year from the DNC.) The bulk of the DNC’s new hires have gone to support OFA, which takes up about half the square footage at party headquarters inside a putty brown stucco building south of the Capitol.

Although Barack Obama has often been described as an “Alinsky organizer”, the calumny was on Alinsky. Barack Obama is the very antithesis of the kind of organizer that Saul Alinsky envisioned: a man who permanently eschewed the limelight; who developed leaders and never became a leader himself and who always lived by the axiom, “let the people decide”. In Obama we see a man who purposefully mobilized supporters in order to control them from the outset. Then when Obama attained the White House, he reconfirmed his earlier decision. Organizing For America became Organizing for President Obama.

To the question, “Where are the Tea Parties of the Left?” the simple answer is: they were led from the top. The crucial question which every man of the left must wrestle with is whether Tea Parties of the Left will ever be led from the bottom. George Orwell always assumed the answer to be “yes” until he learned differently in Catalonia. Most people on the Left think that rebellion is a permanent condition of “their” side. When out of power maybe. When in power things are different. Conservatives operate on a different model from that of the Left. They band together at need but tend to form no permanent organizations. By contrast, the Left is a standing political army. It never sleeps. It never disbands. It is always on the march, in season and out of season. And even when it isn’t doing anything — it is doing something. And when it is in power, it must do even more.

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardferna...-of-the-right/

[off2bed]

Interesting article. The last paragraph seems quite accurate.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Guess what's going to happen on Thursday...







Michelle Bachman, the OTHER Barracuda...

All my love, all my kissin'
You don't know what you've been missin', oh boy,

It's palin to see,

OH! BOY!

(((LIPSTICK)))

[zipman]

Originally Posted by off2bed

Interesting article. The last paragraph seems quite accurate.

LOL, you mean the part of the article that makes no sense and actually contradicts the rest of the article?

Too funny!

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Point out the contradiction please.

[zipman]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Point out the contradiction please.

Sure.

The last parargraph starts by saying that "To the question, “Where are the Tea Parties of the Left?” the simple answer is: they were led from the top." Except that saying who led them doesn't answer the question of where they currently are.

It ends with "By contrast, the Left is a standing political army. It never sleeps. It never disbands. It is always on the march, in season and out of season." If that was the case, the article wouldn't ask where the tea parties are. It would be in the news. The last sentence then contradicts this with an utterly nonsensical statement: "And even when it isn’t doing anything — it is doing something. And when it is in power, it must do even more."

The bottom line is that the article is more gibberish that only a fool would think is a good article.

[off2bed]

Originally Posted by zipman

Sure.

The last parargraph starts by saying that "To the question, “Where are the Tea Parties of the Left?” the simple answer is: they were led from the top." Except that saying who led them doesn't answer the question of where they currently are.

It ends with "By contrast, the Left is a standing political army. It never sleeps. It never disbands. It is always on the march, in season and out of season." If that was the case, the article wouldn't ask where the tea parties are. It would be in the news. The last sentence then contradicts this with an utterly nonsensical statement: "And even when it isn’t doing anything — it is doing something. And when it is in power, it must do even more."

The bottom line is that the article is more gibberish that only a fool would think is a good article.

Are you that dense? Asking the question is just a device the author used to get your interest in reading the article. It's a hook. And it worked.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Actually, I find it terribly consistent; the Left never stops pushing its social crusades and they are never trickle-up efforts, they follow like sheep whenever someone raises hue and cry for they do not think for themselves, rather they rush quickly to each issue, determined to remain one with the consensus as not to look stupid or uncaring, an emotive response rather than a reasoned response.

And it does answer the question, Obama is no longer leading them, he handed them off to Plouffe and Soros, two men who cannot lead; bereft of marching orders, the social soldiers of the left languish and wait for the next call to crusade.

Their problem is, they haven't identified the emotional banner for their weary troops to follow even as Obama says and does things that rally the conservative base out of its slumber.

And that's a nice little bit you end with trying to once again, in liberal fashion, to label anyone who might find a kernel of truth in what's being said a fool...

Typical.



__________________
Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

[SaintPeter]

The Right gets more pathetic by the hour.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by off2bed

Are you that dense? Asking the question is just a device the author used to get your interest in reading the article. It's a hook. And it worked.

And it worked on two levels.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by SaintPeter

The Right gets more pathetic by the hour.

Typical liberal response...


If you don't have anything to add, then just insult...

Beats thinking.



__________________
Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

[SaintPeter]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Typical liberal response...


If you don't have anything to add, then just insult...

Beats thinking.



__________________
Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

Oh yeah. Palin is a dumbass.

[Powertone]

Originally Posted by SaintPeter

Oh yeah. Palin is a dumbass.

lets talk about how dumb she is...you start

name all the truly dumb things about her.


can anything top " Barack's favorite 3 letter word : J-O-B-S "
or: " we guessed wrong "
or: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM19YOqs7hU

[Casualencounter]

The Left has ACORN & SEIU their own professional army of protesters (paid for with tax payers $) they don't need grassroot Tea parties. Ya gotta give the devil it's due.

[vetteman]

Originally Posted by SaintPeter

Oh yeah. Palin is a dumbass.

How dumb can she really be when gauged against Obama, Biden, Reid, and Pelosi?

[badbabysitter]

Maybe the left realizes teabagging means inserting testicles into another mans mouth

[RightField]

I can well imagine how this will all end. Exit polls will show a 30% republican win, but when the ballots are all added up, the libs will win by 3%.

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by off2bed

Are you that dense? Asking the question is just a device the author used to get your interest in reading the article. It's a hook. And it worked.

Kinda like you and this post. I read it, and it's just as stupid as fuck as I expected. But it worked! You got me to look! You win! Yay!

[KingOrfeo]

Conservatives operate on a different model from that of the Left. They band together at need but tend to form no permanent organizations.

WTF?! There are countless permanent organizations in the conservative movement! Or, at least, organizations which are intended to endure from one election cycle to the next, and do. And of course there's the GOP itself, founded in 1854, which shows no signs of disbanding, and (like the Dems, only more so) is in more or less constant campaign mode even in non-election-years, and which in recent decades has consistently outdone the Dems in party discipline.

[tinylittlegnat]

Originally Posted by vetteman

How dumb can she really be when gauged against Obama, Biden, Reid, and Pelosi?

Did any of them say they could see Russia from their front porch and it made good foreign relations experience?

[garbage can]

Originally Posted by RightField

I can well imagine how this will all end. Exit polls will show a 30% republican win, but when the ballots are all added up, the libs will win by 3%.

It's those pesky dead people... they're all liberals...

[garbage can]

Originally Posted by tinylittlegnat

Did any of them say they could see Russia from their front porch and it made good foreign relations experience?

Since you forgot the "big grin", I assume you believed that story.

[tinylittlegnat]

Originally Posted by garbage can

Since you forgot the "big grin", I assume you believed that story.

So you are saying she never said you can see russia from alaska or that it enhances her forgeign policy experience?

[mypoliticalalt]

Democrats enjoy paying taxes. Why would they protest?

[tinylittlegnat]

Originally Posted by mypoliticalalt

Democrats enjoy paying taxes. Why would they protest?

Its always fun giving someone the bill. Try it out next time you take your mother out for a mothers day lunch. When the check comes slide it over to her and tell her you will meet her in the car.