Quotes of the day

posted at 10:35 pm on January 12, 2010 by Allahpundit

“Word from Nashville on Monday was that the First National Tea Party Convention next month will be closed to the press, other than for a limited number of ‘selected’ journalists. No word on who or how many.

“This from the people who brought us last summer’s media-saturated Town Hall meetings…

“If the secrecy sounds a little, well, un-American, Phillips has this explanation: It’s not a political convention, but a ‘working convention.’”

***
“This really is unusual. As a journalist, I’ve been allowed into sessions, dinners, everything at conferences hosted by the Eagle Forum and by Focus on the Family. Extra credit to Eagle Forum here — when I was covering the How to Take Back America Conference in St. Louis, Phyllis Schlafly’s son Andy, an organizer, invited me away from my media seat and into a seat at his dinner table to chat with more activists. And some of the most controversial speakers at the National Tea Party Convention, like Rick Scarborough, happily chatted with me inside and outside of their sessions at previous events.

“One major implication of this, of course, is that for the third time since the presidential election — the first at a speech in China, the second at a speech for a pro-life group in Indiana — Sarah Palin will give a political speech that members of the media are not allowed to attend.”

***
“Let me be blunt: charging people $500.00 plus the costs of travel and lodging to go to a ‘National Tea Party Convention’ run by a for profit group no one has ever heard of sounds as credible as an email from Nigeria promising me a million bucks if I fork over my bank account number…

“The tea party ‘leaders’, if there are any, are actively at work in their home towns changing things one letter to the editor, one contribution to a candidate, and one protest at a time. They are not on bus tours profiting off the hard work and sometimes the names of others (some also on the bus with no pay) headed to Nashville licking their lips at the $500.00 per person payments coming in to their for profit company.

“Sarah Palin is certainly giving the National Tea Party Convention legitimacy. But at what cost? I am fearful this thing will blow up and harm her. I am more fearful that a bunch of well meaning people from across the nation are going to show up, expect more, and then grow disaffected or burn out when the deliverables they expect do not come in.”

***
“‘I’m hearing through sources Sarah Palin is getting $75k to speak at this Tea Party convention,’ blogger Dan Riehl, an admirer of Palin and of the tea partyers, wrote recently after learning that she was charging a substantial fee. ‘That’s a lot of damned tea.’…

“‘She thinks she’s coming to endorse the tea party movement, but most tea party people won’t be there because they can’t afford it,’ said Anthony Shreeve, an East Tennessee tea party organizer who quit the convention’s steering committee. ‘The tea party movement is a grass-roots movement; it’s not a business,’ he said.”

***


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

If only Sarah followed the Clinton’s example…

… the world would be such a better place.

(there is a commercial on American Idol righ now)

Seven Percent Solution on January 12, 2010 at 11:41 PM

yep, you super-sleuths solved the mystery; the Tea Party movement is all about cashing in. Big big profits to be made. Lots of cash flying around, perhaps more the $100,000. And this comes in an age when the major parties have squandered the treasury to the tune of trillions.

But oh my god!!! Stop the presses!! $500 to attend a private three day Tea Party seminar? unheard of lavishness.

exceller on January 12, 2010 at 11:41 PM

When Barack Obama was campaigning for the presidency. And then the US changed back to private meetings the minute he took office.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:41 PM

Key difference you’re not recognizing: Sarah Palin is not engaged in a Presidential race (or any other campaign for public office) — she’s a private citizen — and the organization is a private one also.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:43 PM

They should’ve called it the First National Tea Party Ping Pong Strategy Session.

That way, the press can’t say sheeeiiit.

The Ugly American on January 12, 2010 at 11:44 PM

Key difference you’re not recognizing: Sarah Palin is not engaged in a Presidential race (or any other campaign for public office)…

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:43 PM

There’s about a zillion Palin supporters and Palinbots who would argue that claim.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:45 PM

The Pigs are starting to look human.

Yeah when I look at those CPAC fees I laugh as well. Wouldn’t want to go to that mess either, a couple hundred bucks so you can smell some pols cheap cologne or see hundreds of Alex P Keaton clones. That’s what youtube is for, well if they allow cameras and press (usually most places outside of China do), besides there are plenty of other speeches that won’t cost you a vacation.

If you want to pay 500 bucks to have somebody lie to you buy an escort for the night, at least it’s a fairer trade.

LevStrauss on January 12, 2010 at 11:46 PM

And the privacy of this meeting is respectable as it is also no one else’s business. Really, when did the U.S. become a “no private meetings ever” nation?

Again, I just don’t get the issue here or what is bugging people.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:39 PM

Lourdes, you are correct. It’s the other slow on the uptake commenters here that are making it an issue. They know who they are, right MediocreConsevative?

Americannodash on January 12, 2010 at 11:47 PM

Really, when did the U.S. become a “no private meetings ever” nation?

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:39 PM

When Barack Obama was campaigning for the presidency. And then the US changed back to private meetings the minute he took office.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:41 PM

Other points (different ones, too, from Palin’s situation) is that Obama in his various campaignings literally had campaign associates, associated and otherwise, participants in his campaigns AS members of “media” — so his “travels with the media” were literally him as candidate campaigning (no separation between the two, Obama’s political campaign and employees in/owners of media groups).

Private organizations — politically associated or even defined — have private meetings all.the.time in the U.S. and always have. And they keep track of who from what source with what association is attending (or, more specifically, “allowed access”).

THIS ALSO explains the cost to attend this Tea Party meeting — it’s no help to anyone’s organization and message to allow open access without some degree of control when the message is still being ironed out.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:47 PM

There’s about a zillion Palin supporters and Palinbots who would argue that claim.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:45 PM

Zillion? Now you’re Bill Cosby?

Americannodash on January 12, 2010 at 11:49 PM

Key difference you’re not recognizing: Sarah Palin is not engaged in a Presidential race (or any other campaign for public office)…

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:43 PM

There’s about a zillion Palin supporters and Palinbots who would argue that claim.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:45 PM

Please let the rest of us know what channel you are tuning your tinfoil into so we can all hear the announcement you’ve heard, that Palin’s declared her candidacy (for anything).

I realize you think — reasonably so in this particular regard — that Sarah Palin “*WILL*” declare her candidacy for the Presidency (or some other office, whatever), but here in reality, without the use of a tinfoil hat, there’s no broadcast that’s occurred that covers any speech by Palin in which she’s declared candidacy for anything.

The point is, it’s not happened. Anything CAN happen but the point today is that it has not happened, so in that sense, your addressing a fiction.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:51 PM

“Does not stand to benefit financially” = not taking a speaking fee at all, or donating the entire speaking fee to Tea Party issues?

If it’s the latter, good for her; that would mean that she’s taking money from the morons who are dubbing themselves the leaders of the national movement and giving it to people who can actually make a difference. Go, girl.

Roxeanne de Luca on January 12, 2010 at 11:52 PM

Lourdes, you are correct. It’s the other slow on the uptake commenters here that are making it an issue. They know who they are, right MediocreConsevative?

Americannodash on January 12, 2010 at 11:47 PM

It’s sorta’ easy after a while to discern who is loitering and who isn’t…you’re right.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:52 PM

Word from Nashville on Monday was that the First National Tea Party Convention next month will be closed to the press, other than for a limited number of ’selected’ journalists.

If these tea partiers have any shred of media savvy, they’ll ensure that C-SPAN is among the selected group.

The Ugly American on January 12, 2010 at 11:52 PM

Key difference you’re not recognizing: Sarah Palin is not engaged in a Presidential race (or any other campaign for public office)…

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:43 PM

Honest Injun“, do you promise?

LevStrauss on January 12, 2010 at 11:52 PM

your addressing a fiction.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:51 PM

…you’re addressing…

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:54 PM

The year is 2012,SarahCudas intel team scouts are on point.

The radio crackles,Sarah picks up the phone,

Sarah,we can see the White House kitchen window,
we await your orders,

as a GaBillionZillion SarahCuda Troops are amassed!!
(Snark).

canopfor on January 12, 2010 at 11:55 PM

THIS ALSO explains the cost to attend this Tea Party meeting — it’s no help to anyone’s organization and message to allow open access without some degree of control when the message is still being ironed out.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:47 PM

It is when the basis of the conference is free and open rallies. And again, I’m not opposed to recouping costs and expenses. Nor do I care that Palin took the fee she was offered. The problem is that more people probably would have been able to attend if they didn’t have to pony up half a grand to get in, and their inability to do so is the fault of the organizers of the event who decided to rack up huge costs by offering speaking fees to people who were going to benefit by attending anyway.

Americannodash on January 12, 2010 at 11:47 PM

Oh cute. You’re manipulating my user name. That’s very original and witty. Come on now, why not default to your earlier response from the headlines comments? You said I wasn’t worth more than that. Apparently you lied. Tsk tsk.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:55 PM

LevStrauss on January 12, 2010 at 11:52 PM

It’s only a thing that exists in reality when it’s created.

When she declares her candidacy, then it’s “real” in the sense I’m referring to.

Arguing about this is ridiculous.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Key difference you’re not recognizing: Sarah Palin is not engaged in a Presidential race (or any other campaign for public office)…

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:43 PM

There’s about a zillion Palin supporters and Palinbots who would argue that claim.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:45 PM

Which doesn’t make her a presidential candidate.

ddrintn on January 12, 2010 at 11:55 PM

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:55 PM

…I never understand your mania, seriously, I just don’t understand it. I could write about flies that may exist somewhere on the Planet Zargos past the seventh moon of the Flaming Galaxy and you’d write seven hundred blog entries about why you know the flies are giants.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:56 PM

or
crassroots

/maddow

blatantblue on January 12, 2010 at 11:57 PM

Please let the rest of us know what channel you are tuning your tinfoil into so we can all hear the announcement you’ve heard, that Palin’s declared her candidacy (for anything).

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:51 PM

Ah, willfully being obtuse, and insulting while doing so. Shocka. As I know that you’re no stranger to this site, and likely to many other blogs, I know that you’ve waded through the Palin posts full of people citing her already as winning the next presidential election, and are blithely pretending all those people don’t exist.

What is it with blinders for some of Palin’s supporters? I was never issued any.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:58 PM

“the press” feels that it is entitled to everything, and really has a hard accepting that it really does not. oh, shocks

runner on January 12, 2010 at 11:58 PM

It’s only a thing that exists in reality when it’s created.

When she declares her candidacy, then it’s “real” in the sense I’m referring to.

Arguing about this is ridiculous.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Well then you’re no “honest injun” either, if I have an affair and I don’t declare it then it did not happen and is not real? You telling me that Hillary was not running for President until she declared? Horsesh!t.

LevStrauss on January 12, 2010 at 11:59 PM

…I never understand your mania, seriously, I just don’t understand it.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:56 PM

I’m really glad you can discuss Palin rationally without insulting and ridiculing the person with whom you’re talking, when they’ve not done any such thing to you. So many others are unable to rise to your level of…oh, gosh darnit.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:00 AM

It’s sorta’ easy after a while to discern who is loitering and who isn’t…you’re right.

Lourdes on January 12, 2010 at 11:52 PM

In this instance, MadCon is wrong. Although, 99% of the time I agree with him. He is brilliant and he knows it but nobody is perfect. I think it’s just one of those days for him. Redstate lead him astray.

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:01 AM

In this instance, MadCon is wrong. Although, 99% of the time I agree with him.

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:01 AM

So all it took was a 1% disagreement, and your only response was…oh, that’s right. It was deleted.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:02 AM

Why would a private group that charged attendees $500 to attend let people watch it for free? Is this some sort of “unique” god given right? If you want the low down, pay the money, go to the convention and watch for yourself. Otherwise, wait for a tape later.
What a bunch of whinny little dolts.
As for this group not representing the “Tea Party”…. come on… who the hell represents all the Tea Parties anyway… no one does. This is one small group that apparently is trying to bring together organizers to trade ideas and build connections. If someone from another Tea Party group organizes another convention in a few months, then some more Tea Party groups could go to that one… and so could Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and anyone else they want to invite… Dick Armey’s group could organize one too. Otherwise what are you left with as far as going to the next step? More marches and a bunch of low level speakers… eventually the Tea Party movement has to get organized and raise money to support their candidates. Having hundreds of little groups is great, but what happens when election time comes around? Should they not co-ordinate themselves?

PhilipJames on January 13, 2010 at 12:02 AM

As I know that you’re no stranger to this site, and likely to many other blogs, I know that you’ve waded through the Palin posts full of people citing her already as winning the next presidential election, and are blithely pretending all those people don’t exist.

MadisonConservative on January 12, 2010 at 11:58 PM

I don’t follow the logic. A lot of people think Palin should run for president, therefore she’s a candidate and everything she does must be viewed through the prism of appropriateness for a presidential candidate?

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:03 AM

“This really is unusual. As a journalist, I’ve been allowed into sessions”

Yeah, but you haven’t been let into secessions.

Buddahpundit on January 13, 2010 at 12:04 AM

The tea party movement is a grass-roots movement; it’s not a business,’ he said.

Give me a break. Let’s look back to what the movie was named after… Did they just keep throwing tea in the water over and over, and raise their fists and say “we’re mad”! No…they harnessed the outrage and turned it into action – organizing to the hilt. So much so, they organinzed a government for an entire country. Grass roots are just that…roots…beginnings. Yes, this originated with the people…but it’s gotta head somewhere.

miConsevative on January 13, 2010 at 12:07 AM

^ Or, more likely, detractors are the ones who think she’s a candidate, and so then everything she does or says that doesn’t quite pass the “candidateness” test is pointed at with an “Aha! see?? she can’t possibly be a candidate!!”

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:07 AM

So all it took was a 1% disagreement, and your only response was…oh, that’s right. It was deleted.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:02 AM

If you like, it can be repeated. BTW, your twitter says that you swear a lot.

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:08 AM

A lot of people think Palin should run for president, therefore she’s a candidate and everything she does must be viewed through the prism of appropriateness for a presidential candidate?

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:03 AM

You’re extrapolating an entire salad from a head of lettuce. I was only disputing the notion that she’s not a presidential candidate. Officially, no. Realistically, yes. Well, perhaps less so now that she’s on the Fox payroll, but denying she’s a presidential candidate is akin to claiming Perot wasn’t in the mid-90s.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:12 AM

Can’t get inside a convention = Out Rage!!!!!

Can’t get inside The Senate = Whatevs

- The Cat

MirCat on January 13, 2010 at 12:12 AM

Good night all.

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:14 AM

This Tea Party stuff should remain disorganized. I don’t want Newt or Huck or some other huckster to get control of it and end up stealing funds or something.

Speedwagon82 on January 13, 2010 at 12:14 AM

^ Or, more likely, detractors are the ones who think she’s a candidate, and so then everything she does or says that doesn’t quite pass the “candidateness” test is pointed at with an “Aha! see?? she can’t possibly be a candidate!!”

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:07 AM

I don’t give a damn about her “candidateness”…is that even a word? It’s just ridiculous for some to so adamantly claim she’s not a presidential candidate when that’s typically what her supporters claim is not only her intention, but her destiny.

If you like, it can be repeated. BTW, your twitter says that you swear a lot.

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:08 AM

Yeah, I do. Just not as much on website where they discourage it. And something tells me you shouldn’t repeat it, since it was deleted.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:15 AM

OT: White House credits stimulus with up to 2M jobs

uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:18 AM

Tomorrow is going to be fun.

uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:18 AM

shouldn’t repeat it, since it was deleted.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:15 AM

It’s still there [@ two different places]. Nice try. Good night again. I mean it this time.

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:22 AM

Americannodash on January 13, 2010 at 12:22 AM

So it is. By all means, then…return to it. Dazzle us.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:23 AM

I don’t give a damn about her “candidateness”…is that even a word? It’s just ridiculous for some to so adamantly claim she’s not a presidential candidate when that’s typically what her supporters claim is not only her intention, but her destiny.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:15 AM

Which is still irrelevant when judging Palin’s own actions. So, that illustrates the point. And no, “candidateness” isn’t a word, which is why it was enclosed in quotation marks.

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:25 AM

The press and libtards are making more of a fuss about this than not being allowed to observe the new Hell Care Bill being crafted and grafted by the Dems in Congress.

omnipotent on January 13, 2010 at 12:25 AM

You’re both stubborn and at least one of you sure does like to hear yourself talk.

beachgirlusa on January 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

HillBuzz offers words of warning about this convention:

http://hillbuzz.org/2010/01/12/about-the-tea-party-convention-in-tennessee/

pearson on January 12, 2010 at 10:55 PM

Eric Erickson of Red State offers the same argument against the Tea Party and the Palinista’s have attacked him in force. What they are saying is that the Tea Party movement does not need to become a third party movement or Obie wins in 2012. I tend to agree.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

You’re extrapolating an entire salad from a head of lettuce. I was only disputing the notion that she’s not a presidential candidate. Officially, no. Realistically, yes. Well, perhaps less so now that she’s on the Fox payroll, but denying she’s a presidential candidate is akin to claiming Perot wasn’t in the mid-90s.

MadisonConservative on January 13, 2010 at 12:12 AM

I must have missed the part where she declared herself a candidate. Perot did that.

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:27 AM

The press and libtards are making more of a fuss about this than not being allowed to observe the new Hell Care Bill being crafted and grafted by the Dems in Congress.

omnipotent on January 13, 2010 at 12:25 AM

Palin scares liberals (and the GOP) more than Obamacare scares conservatives.

uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:27 AM

Seems pretty simple to me…Palin is the anti-Marxist.

Connie on January 13, 2010 at 12:28 AM

Eric Erickson of Red State offers the same argument against the Tea Party and the Palinista’s have attacked him in force. What they are saying is that the Tea Party movement does not need to become a third party movement or Obie wins in 2012. I tend to agree.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

Obama’s probably winning again in 2012 regardless.

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:28 AM

I must have missed the part where she declared herself a candidate. Perot did that.

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:27 AM

Some people have this thing, where they create their own reality, and then project it onto the world.

Like the dude from Mythbusters said: “I reject your reality and substitute my own.”

Palin has not declared anything. No matter how bad some people WANT her to run for President in 2012, she has refused to even drop hints. It’s not in the bank for 2012 until she says so.

uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:29 AM

Obama’s probably winning again in 2012 regardless.

ddrintn on January 13, 2010 at 12:28 AM

Let’s have more hope than that. Good lord that is scary! Let us try to stop that. :)

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:30 AM

Also pretty simple to me is that AP is less concerned with issues and more concerned with shallow discussions of personalities. Sad.

Connie on January 13, 2010 at 12:32 AM

Can’t get inside a convention = Out Rage!!!!!

Can’t get inside The Senate = Whatevs

MirCat on January 13, 2010 at 12:12 AM

+1

miConsevative on January 13, 2010 at 12:32 AM

I agree with no third party movement. RP ppl stop requesting me on fb.

Connie on January 13, 2010 at 12:35 AM

Eric Erickson of Red State offers the same argument against the Tea Party and the Palinista’s have attacked him in force. What they are saying is that the Tea Party movement does not need to become a third party movement or Obie wins in 2012. I tend to agree.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

Erikson’s paychecks come from one of the CPAC sponsors, so he does have a conflict of interest seeing as how CPAC feels snubbed by Palin.

In my view, Palin speaking to the Tea Party is a good thing. She is a Republican, and she is smart, and she knows that the foundation for the Tea Party needs to be the foundation for the GOP. Until the GOP knocks off this appeasement crap with the libs this country is screwed.

The GOP does not have the answers, which is why their coffers are bare. They make incompetence an art-form.

So I’ll leave you with what I said in the headlines,

The GOP should be on their knees getting tea-bagged, by the Tea Partiers, and loving it. Because without the Tea Party movement, Obamacare, Cap and Trade, and Amnesty would already be law.

uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:38 AM

QUEEN PELOSI’S NEW JET

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 12:40 AM

In my view, Palin speaking to the Tea Party is a good thing. She is a Republican, and she is smart, and she knows that the foundation for the Tea Party needs to be the foundation for the GOP. Until the GOP knocks off this appeasement crap with the libs this country is screwed.

uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:38 AM

I agree! Very good post. I just don’t want no third party. Seems as Hillbuzz says that they are peeking behind the curtains and we do not like what they see as far as the organizers of this Tea Party Convention and who they are.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM

In my view, Palin speaking to the Tea Party is a good thing. She is a Republican, and she is smart, and she knows that the foundation for the Tea Party needs to be the foundation for the GOP. Until the GOP knocks off this appeasement crap with the libs this country is screwed.
uknowmorethanme on January 13, 2010 at 12:38 AM
I agree! Very good post. I just don’t want no third party. Seems as Hillbuzz says that they are peeking behind the curtains and they do not like what they see as far as the organizers of this Tea Party Convention and who they are.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM

Sorry it’s getting late.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:46 AM

Has no one ever been to a conference of any kind before? $500 is a pretty middling price. When I go to a conference for work, I don’t wonder where they $$$ goes. If I learn some valuable things to take back to my job and make some useful connections, it’s money well spent. What the organizers do with it is their business provided it’s not illegal.

Besides which, I would think this is the sort of thing where local tea party groups would pool their money and send a representative from their organization. Then that person comes back and shares the tips and strategies they’ve learned at the conference. It’s not like a rock concert or something (although tickets to those are pretty steep these days as well).

NoLeftTurn on January 12, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Yes, I agree. I know that $500 is a big chunk of money for folks in this economy, myself included, but this includes 5 meals plus a large banquet over a 3 day period, plus speakers (Sarah!) and other events/workshops. Comparatively it’s not much more than what you’d see for other 3 day conferences. And yes, it’s geared towards Tea Party reps.

atheling on January 13, 2010 at 12:47 AM

Empress Michelle, that is.

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 12:47 AM

Empress Michelle, that is.

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 12:47 AM

Well maybe now she can be proud of her country!

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:48 AM

Where have you people been living this past summer? Not on this planet. I went to a huge tea party in Atlanta and the press ignored it or made fun of it. There was easily over twenty thousand people there. Have you not seen what they do to any speakers at tea parties? They vilify them and cut and edit the film to show anger and hate. Remember MSNBC and the black dude with the AR-15 but they wouldn’t show his face or hands because it would not fit the image of the angry white tea partier with a gun? Remember the black preacher who was knocked down and beaten by the thugs at SEIU? Yea, I might make it a closed door meeting too. If the members at this meeting have any plans to discuss they had better do it out of sight of the vultures in the media.

inspectorudy on January 13, 2010 at 12:53 AM

Has no one ever been to a conference of any kind before? $500 is a pretty middling price. When I go to a conference for work, I don’t wonder where they $$$ goes. If I learn some valuable things to take back to my job and make some useful connections, it’s money well spent. What the organizers do with it is their business provided it’s not illegal.

Besides which, I would think this is the sort of thing where local tea party groups would pool their money and send a representative from their organization. Then that person comes back and shares the tips and strategies they’ve learned at the conference. It’s not like a rock concert or something (although tickets to those are pretty steep these days as well).

NoLeftTurn on January 12, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Spot on! I’ve said the same thing myself here. With all due respect to my fellow Hot Air commenters, anyone who thinks $500 is a big deal for this sort of thing is pretty ignorant.

I’ve paid more for less. Or should I say my company has.

This handwringing over the price is unreal. You all sound like a bunch of idiot liberals who want everything handed to you for free!

Even better, you expect Sarah to run all over the country and “save the world” for free too!

Since when were conservatives against capitalism? That’s the other guys!

This is a woman who six months ago was making $125, 000 a year for God’s sake! Remember, she turned down a $25,000 raise. She’s not some millionairess with money to burn…yet. She’s a mother with 5 kids to support. (and a small staff!)

Plus she still has a $500,000 lawyer’s bill, thanks to the filthy Obama scumbags in Alaska.

You guys need a serious dose of reality.

gary4205 on January 13, 2010 at 1:00 AM

Michelle Obama’s Personal Staff – enough to play both sides in the Super Bowl

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM

Who IS that in swimsuit ?
OMG!!!!!

macncheez on January 13, 2010 at 1:04 AM

Yes, I agree. I know that $500 is a big chunk of money for folks in this economy
atheling on January 13, 2010 at 12:47 AM

definitely for the working class. Those workshops must be amazing. I sure hope the Tea Party reps will come out of this enlightened and fulfilled.

disillusioned on January 13, 2010 at 1:05 AM

disillusioned on January 13, 2010 at 1:05 AM

You’re obviously not in management.

atheling on January 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM

You’re both stubborn and at least one of you sure does like to hear yourself talk.

beachgirlusa on January 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

Reminds me of a snark: Is that a trained parrot or is there an echo in here?

platypus on January 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM

I don’t consider myself a die hard Republican, as a matter of fact I just changed my voting status so I can vote in the primary. I have enjoyed the tea parties I have attended but I would not embrace a third party. We have all the idiots I can keep up with in two parties.

Cindy Munford on January 12, 2010 at 11:05 PM

+++1000 AMEN!

lovingmyUSA on January 13, 2010 at 1:15 AM

atheling on January 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM

I try not to be, sometimes in vain. My comment wasn’t as much directed at the cost, but rather the purpose.

disillusioned on January 13, 2010 at 1:16 AM

So the long knives come out when Palin makes a play to become a defacto head of the tea party. and these long knives are from mostly GOP members…..imagine that.

i am shocked….just shocked that when a group of people are trying to organize to shake off the yoke of the two party system that one of those parties(the one that would be most impacted if that event were to occur) decides to attack that event….and by extension the person trying to get those people’s vote.

what the Tea Party convention is doing is getting leaders selected/trained to go back home and take over the GOP from within and for some reason the GOP party “leaders” have a problem with this?

Of course they want the Tea party to stay unfocused, to stay leaderless that way they do not have to compete in the arena of ideas and simply be the party of not Obama to win. If the Tea party gets leaders, a platform, esp local leaders and a national figure head then the GOP must form some ideas and have an agenda to compete against the TEA party.

So these attacks are nothing new.

unseen on January 13, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Who IS that in swimsuit ?
OMG!!!!!

macncheez on January 13, 2010 at 1:04 AM

It seems to be some kind of hybrid. The head and torso of a woman and the legs of an elephant.

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 1:22 AM

“The tea party ‘leaders’, if there are any, are actively at work in their home towns changing things one letter to the editor, one contribution to a candidate, and one protest at a time. They are not on bus tours profiting off the hard work and sometimes the names of others (some also on the bus with no pay) headed to Nashville licking their lips at the $500.00 per person payments coming in to their for profit company.

“Sarah Palin is certainly giving the National Tea Party Convention legitimacy. But at what cost? I am fearful this thing will blow up and harm her. I am more fearful that a bunch of well meaning people from across the nation are going to show up, expect more, and then grow disaffected or burn out when the deliverables they expect do not come in.”

SAME THING CAN BE SAID ABOUT CPAC! SO ANY POLITICIAN WHO WILL ATTEND CPAC IS HURTING HIS OR HER NAME, ESPECIALLY IF THE ORGANIZER IS JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY!

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 1:24 AM

unseen on January 13, 2010 at 1:18 AM

thumbs up there. The two party system seems to always maintain it’s checks and balances though. Have the same thing happen at the same time for the Dems also, and I’ll go to a tea party just for the fun of it while biting my thumb to keep it in context.

disillusioned on January 13, 2010 at 1:27 AM

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 1:22 AM

phunder phighs
ugh!
no wonder MSM didn’t splash that pic all over !
I’m so e-mailing this pic to my friends who still see her as the one and only Miss Galaxy

macncheez on January 13, 2010 at 1:28 AM

That’s what youtube is for, well if they allow cameras and press (usually most places outside of China do),

LevStrauss on January 12

With the exception of the US Congress and President “C-Span” Obama.

DSchoen on January 13, 2010 at 1:30 AM

The Tea Party movement is leery of dealing with the press you say? Why I have no idea why that might be!

Dark Eden on January 13, 2010 at 1:33 AM

So the long knives come out when Palin makes a play to become a defacto head of the tea party. and these long knives are from mostly GOP members…..imagine that.

i am shocked….just shocked that when a group of people are trying to organize to shake off the yoke of the two party system that one of those parties(the one that would be most impacted if that event were to occur) decides to attack that event….and by extension the person trying to get those people’s vote.

what the Tea Party convention is doing is getting leaders selected/trained to go back home and take over the GOP from within and for some reason the GOP party “leaders” have a problem with this?

Of course they want the Tea party to stay unfocused, to stay leaderless that way they do not have to compete in the arena of ideas and simply be the party of not Obama to win. If the Tea party gets leaders, a platform, esp local leaders and a national figure head then the GOP must form some ideas and have an agenda to compete against the TEA party.

So these attacks are nothing new.

unseen on January 13, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Exactly. But AP tried to miss out one thing.

RedState and Erickson are part organizers of CPAC. He’s mad that his CPAC venture won’t be attended by the Conservative Heavyweight Superstar, SARAH HEATH PALIN… too bad for CPAC money making business.

You know, CPAC and David Keene need more money to finance candidates like Scuzzyfuva. RedState is said to be pro-TP and anti-Scuzzy. But it comes to business, Redstate management remains under the WILL of the Old Republicans.

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 1:33 AM

and the legs of an elephant.

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 1:22 AM

Well certainly not the legs of a donkey.

atheling on January 13, 2010 at 1:34 AM

The following list of the 10 most common OSS (Obama Stockholm Syndrome) symptoms may help concerned citizens recognize this affliction in friends or relatives and assess the seriousness of the condition. Treatment and rehabilitation are possible if the disease has not progressed to Stage Four.

The afflicted person should be asked to agree or disagree with each of the following 10 statements, with one to five points awarded depending on the degree of agreement with the statement. Appropriate treatment will be based on the person’s score on a scale from 10 to 50 points.

1. You believe that the Obama bumper sticker on your Prius automatically extends its warranty to the year 2016.

2. You think Obama should have won the Nobel Prize in Philanthropy for giving away other people’s money.

3. You believe that the 1.5 million people who protested excessive government spending on the Capitol Mall on Sept. 12 were all part of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

4. You believe the colder winters across Europe and North America over the past 11 years, the cooling of the Pacific Ocean and the increased ice accumulation in the Antarctic are all convincing evidence of global warming.

5. You think the best way to stop the drug cartel violence in Mexico from spilling into the U.S. is to curtail handgun sales in Omaha, Denver and Spokane.

6. You think Obama’s acquiescence to Iran’s nuclear weapons is a giant step toward peace in the Middle East.

7. You believe that giving amnesty to 15 million illegal aliens will actively discourage another 15 million from coming across our open borders in the decade ahead.

8. You believe that a committee of United Nations bureaucrats should be given a veto over U.S. economic policies in order to reverse the destruction of the planet’s environment by American capitalism.

9. You think al-Qaida will not attack America again because Barack Hussein Obama and not George Bush is now the face of America in the Muslim world.

10. You believe that Obamacare will provide better health care for more Americans at lower cost without rationing because government-run services are always more efficient than services provided by the greedy private sector.

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 1:38 AM

“‘I’m hearing through sources Sarah Palin is getting $75k to speak at this Tea Party convention,’ blogger Dan Riehl, an admirer of Palin and of the tea partyers, wrote recently after learning that she was charging a substantial fee. ‘That’s a lot of damned tea.’…

“‘She thinks she’s coming to endorse the tea party movement, but most tea party people won’t be there because they can’t afford it,’ said Anthony Shreeve, an East Tennessee tea party organizer who quit the convention’s steering committee. ‘The tea party movement is a grass-roots movement; it’s not a business,’ he said.”

DAN REIHL HAS GONE SO MS-NBC ON THIS ONE.

TEA PARTY CONVENTION IS NOT A TEA PARTY MEETING … OR EVEN A RALLY! IT’S ORGANIZATIONAL WORKSHOP FOR LEADERS.

IT IS THE FIRST STEP TO FORMALIZE THE TP MOVEMENT.

Why the formality? Simple. So that TP Movement will become institutionalized. This is necessary to protect itself from labels such as a simple bunch of moronic radicals. Case in point: HEADLINE OF HA.

REIHL SHOULD ATTEND TP CONVENTION IF HE THINKS HE IS ABLE ENOUGH TO LEAD ONE TEA PARTY ORGANIZATION.

But I don’t think so. He’s more of blogger … not a TP leader.

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 1:39 AM

“Let me be blunt: charging people $500.00 plus the costs of travel and lodging to go to a ‘National Tea Party Convention’ run by a for profit group no one has ever heard of sounds as credible as an email from Nigeria promising me a million bucks if I fork over my bank account number…

To Redstate: So,

Given EE’s statement:

1. RedState is AGAINST PROFIT.

2. RedState prefers old-timer JBS (enemy of the Great Old Conservative Buckley) over a fresh (= clean start just like TPM) profit group.

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 1:48 AM

MB4 on January 13, 2010 at 1:38 AM

Those who score a perfect 50 get a prize

macncheez on January 13, 2010 at 1:49 AM

SAME THING CAN BE SAID ABOUT CPAC! SO ANY POLITICIAN WHO WILL ATTEND CPAC IS HURTING HIS OR HER NAME, ESPECIALLY IF THE ORGANIZER IS JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY!
TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 1:24 AM

This is necessary to protect itself from labels such as a simple bunch of moronic radicals.
TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 1:39 AM

Interesting quotes when put together.

disillusioned on January 13, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Interesting quotes when put together.

disillusioned on January 13, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Nope.

The former is indeed a sarcasm. Redstate is essentially wanting TP movement to be leaderless, no theme, no national backbone to organize … because it’s GRASSROOTS. But he forgot that CPAC is also GRASSROOTS. Ericksson is simply “contradicting himself”. Why can’t he just state that “he’s disappointed of Palin for not attending CPAC, the activity he has invested in … for profit?” I hope not. He’s still a good conservative despite everything.

The second one reveals the true meaning of my first comment. TP Movement, just like CPAC, needs an institutional backbone. Why? Effectiveness and efficiecy as pointed by many Organizational Theory textbooks (notwithstanding high-level treatises on the subject.)

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 3:47 AM

“‘I’m hearing through sources Sarah Palin is getting $75k to speak at this Tea Party convention,’ blogger Dan Riehl, an admirer of Palin and of the tea partyers, wrote recently after learning that she was charging a substantial fee. ‘That’s a lot of damned tea.’…

Okey. Dan Reihl. Can you promise us that all speakers at the CPAC and even CPAC itself will never receive any fee or profit from the activity? If not, this is just an unfair jab on Palin.

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 3:50 AM

The Tea Party Convention is beginning to stink. At first I thought this was going to be a gathering of grassroots activists where education was going to be the purpose of the event. Now it just looks like some kind of elitist fat cat event.

Not sure what that convention represents at this point.

True_King on January 13, 2010 at 5:33 AM

Eric Erickson of Red State offers the same argument against the Tea Party and the Palinista’s have attacked him in force. What they are saying is that the Tea Party movement does not need to become a third party movement or Obie wins in 2012. I tend to agree.

Dire Straits on January 13, 2010 at 12:26 AM

Geesh. You’re such an idiot. ERICKSON IS A PRO TPM until his RS blog decided to sponsor/support CPAC. When Palin announce her NON-ATTENDANCE, ERICKSON ATTACKED.

Palinistas are just reactionists to the matters made worse by Erickson.

WHO WENT TO TV TO ATTACK WHOM WHAT AND WHERE? ANSWER:
WHO ATTACKED: ERICK ERICKSON.
ATTACKED WHOM: PALIN
WHERE: TV
WHAT: PALIN’S ANNOUNCEMENT NOT TO ATTEND CPAC

No Palin supporter ever did that. IT WAS ERICKSON. Stapleton only issued a defense for Palin’s decision AGAINST ATTACKERS!

At least Dan Reihl has the audacity to express his disdain of Palin’s decision through his BLOG.

But NO.

TheAlamos on January 13, 2010 at 5:37 AM

The Tea Party Convention is beginning to stink. At first I thought this was going to be a gathering of grassroots activists where education was going to be the purpose of the event. Now it just looks like some kind of elitist fat cat event.

Not sure what that convention represents at this point.

True_King on January 13, 2010 at 5:33 AM

Give me a freaking break! Talk about sabotage of the Tea Party movement…and now so-called pundunts are professing to know what Sarah should do…where she should go, who she should talk to, and heaven forbid if she makes money off of speaking engagements like other male politicians do!!!
LET ME BE CLEAR…STFU!!! Let Sarah do what the hell she wants to do! Stop trying to second-guess, trying to paint her into a nice, neat, tidy little political box….Stop drafting her to run as president–she will let us know when the time comes.
We can be as enthusiastic as we want, but ultimately the ball is in her court….
Let Sarah be Sarah–let her run her life as she sees fit–it’s her life after all, not ours.

lovingmyUSA on January 13, 2010 at 6:09 AM

Maybe it is this simple.

CPAC is very well established. The Tea Parties are grassroots and loose.

Sarah may be just drawing attention to leaders who can return to localities to continue the activism.

I don’t know. I don’t really care. Any attention to the movement, TP or Conservative, is good attention.

As a Conservative within driving distance of Nashville, I won’t attend, but by golly, I’ll be going to my county’s tea party meeting next Monday night!

DavidAllen on January 13, 2010 at 6:30 AM

I’m sure the Sons of Liberty invited the media to their meetings too.

(In case no one has noticed, the cheerleading media has become part of the problem.)

dtestard on January 13, 2010 at 7:02 AM

Time for blogs to endorse candidates like newspapers did before they disappeared. Let’s the reader know whether to cancel or not.

JiangxiDad on January 13, 2010 at 7:02 AM

“Word from Nashville on Monday was that the First National Tea Party Convention next month will be closed to the press, other than for a limited number of ’selected’ journalists. No word on who or how many.

I’ll leave it to others to debate what limits there are or should be on freedom of the press other than to say that the press doesn’t have an automatic right to cover events and that seems to be the underlying theme with this thread- How dare the Tea Party put limits on the media, don’t they know who we are?

We have an administration and President who has decided to craft, in secret, an entire bill that would grab one-sixth of the economy and deliver it to the Federal government. The media has been exgtremely lax in covering the details of this legislation or the fact that Obama and his co-conspirators in the Congress have done all of this far far far away from the glare of the media. We still don’t know what deals have been cut by skulking staffers while Congress has been on vacation.

Isn’t that more snit-worthy than if MSNBC can get Anderson Cooper into Tea Party events in order to trash Sarah Palin and sneer at the kind of populism you don’t find in the Hamptons.

highhopes on January 13, 2010 at 7:12 AM

Sarah Palin is certainly giving the National Tea Party Convention legitimacy. But at what cost? I am fearful this thing will blow up and harm her.

It’s just precious to see all the crocodile tears and concern-trolling about how “worried” pseudo-cons are about Palin’s image.

Lehosh on January 13, 2010 at 7:15 AM

but most tea party people won’t be there because they can’t afford it,’ said Anthony Shreeve, an East Tennessee tea party organizer who quit the convention’s steering committee.

Isn’t this just a tad insulting here to Tea Party People? Isn’t this implying just a little that Tea Partiers are mostly just a bunch of low class hicks?

JellyToast on January 13, 2010 at 7:16 AM

Bull effin’ crap!

It’s $300 plus lodging expenses, I believe. Gee, grumpy morning coffee darnit. Liars. All of them. Bunch of stinking liars, from the TOP down!

ProudPalinFan on January 13, 2010 at 7:17 AM

Dan Riehl should be happy that she will not make a dime on her speech!!!

deidre on January 12, 2010 at 10:39 PM

I don’t trust and I don’t like Riehl because of his attitude towards the Natalee Holloway case (katablog can attest to this).

ProudPalinFan on January 13, 2010 at 7:18 AM

Time for blogs to endorse candidates like newspapers did before they disappeared. Let’s the reader know whether to cancel or not.

JiangxiDad on January 13, 2010 at 7:02 AM

I’d rather blogs act as the truth tellers instead of giving endorsements. The Coakley gaffe of mis-spelling the name of her state went viral in the very brief time the attack ad was up on the internet. Death Panels became a major issue in healthcare reform thanks to blogs. Blogs should be the clearinghouse for reality. The only caveat being that all blogs are not reliable (so their endorsements would be equally worthless). For example, you can’t tell the difference between White House propaganda, Kos, and the Huffington Post. To use blogs as truth tellers, you need to go to the adult blogs (no, not porn sites) where there is legitimate objectivity.

highhopes on January 13, 2010 at 7:19 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3