Surprise: NYT now covering lefty “Coffee Party”

posted at 10:14 pm on March 1, 2010 by Allahpundit

First WaPo picked up the beat, now the Times chimes in with a flattering profile penned by Kate “Is Jason Mattera a racist?” Zernike. The first blog post on the CP website is dated February 23, as is the “About Us” page, which means it took the two biggest papers in America less than a week after the new site started posting in earnest to catch lefty grassroots Coffee Party fee-vah. (Their Facebook page has been up since last month.) Fancy that.

It’s good to be the king.

It had nearly 40,000 members as of Monday afternoon, but the numbers were growing quickly — about 11,000 people had signed on as fans since the morning…

The slogan is “Wake Up and Stand Up.” The mission statement declares that the federal government is “not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans.”

Local chapters are planning meetings in cities from Washington to San Antonio to Los Angeles (where there have been four in the last month.) The party (coffeepartyusa.org) is planning nationwide coffee houses for March 13, where people can gather to decide which issues they want to take on and even which candidates they want to support…

“We’re not the opposite of the Tea Party,” Ms. Park, 41, said. “We’re a different model of civic participation, but in the end we may want some of the same things.”

Thirty people turned up at the LA chapter meeting this past Sunday; I assume they’ll be getting a full NYT Sunday Magazine profile when they hit 50. You’ll find their latest video below. I still can’t figure out what it is they’re for, but I’m intrigued by the choice of music. I assume they’re using it in the same ironic spirit in which Lennon wrote it, because if they’re really aiming at civic revolution through kaffeeklatsches, I don’t know what to say.

Exit observation: I’m getting a distinct “beta male” vibe from this group. Does that mean I have to root for them?


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 3 4 5

So crr6, you really don’t have an answer besides the claim that modern progressives (or Marxists, Statists, Socialists, Collectivists, Leninists, Stalinists,.. )
Are Nothing like Statists of the past – despite the fact that they have the very same collectivist ideology.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Well all you’re doing is taking everything bad…ever, and trying to categorize it under an extremely broad ideology that also includes (according to you) current Democrats. So yeah, your whole premise is completely bs.

I’m going to categorize Nazis, Communists as “war-mongerers”. Because of the Republican Party’s relatively hawkish stance, I’ll also include them under ideological umbrella of “war-mongerers”.

So are you saying Republicans Nothing like Warmongerer’s of the past – despite the fact that they have the very same warmonger ideology?

See how that works?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM

That STILL Doesn’t answer the question.
If Statism is such a great deal, why does the populace have to be suppressed?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:28 PM

Well good luck to the latte liberals in their endeavors.

That’s what elections are for as Obama says.

Queen0fCups on March 2, 2010 at 1:30 PM

I’m going to categorize Nazis, Communists as “war-mongerers”. Because of the Republican Party’s relatively hawkish stance, I’ll also include them under ideological umbrella of “war-mongerers”.

So are you saying Republicans Nothing like Warmongerer’s of the past – despite the fact that they have the very same warmonger ideology?

See how that works?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM

That Republican/Warmonger comparison would work if for the fact that with the exception of Iraq and Afghanistan, every war of the 20th century was led by democrats.

See … it only works if you have your facts right. That’s OK though, I know progressives don’t use facts, they get in the way of “progress”.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:31 PM

That STILL Doesn’t answer the question.
If Statism is such a great deal, why does the populace have to be suppressed?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:28 PM

I don’t think communism (or whatever you would define as “statism”( is a great deal you moron. Just like you don’t think Communism is a great deal.

You STILL haven’t answered my question though:

So are you saying Republicans Nothing like Warmongerer’s of the past (Nazis, Communists) – despite the fact that they have the very same warmonger ideology?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

That Republican/Warmonger comparison would work if for the fact that with the exception of Iraq and Afghanistan, every war of the 20th century was led by democrats.

The Republican party today is more hawkish than the Democratic Party. The analogy works. Buzz off, little gnat.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:34 PM

So are you saying Republicans Nothing like Warmongerer’s of the past (Nazis, Communists) – despite the fact that they have the very same warmonger ideology?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Yet each of the wars in the past, as stated, were led by democrats…so respond to facts not your wishful thinking.
as per:

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:31 PM

One can’t answer a question that is not truthfully presented….imagine, JFK the war monger….

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:37 PM

The Republican party today is more hawkish than the Democratic Party. The analogy works. Buzz off, little gnat.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Hell no … I won’t buzz off. I’m going to keep reminding you how ignorant you are of history, and how vicious and suppressive the ideology you support is. If you don’t like it you buzz off simpleton.

By the way, you should read the Soviet Constitution one day … I think it’ll sound familiar to you. The democrats are already very familiar with it … in fact they’re trying to copy it.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:39 PM

The Republican party today is more hawkish than the Democratic Party. The analogy works. Buzz off, little gnat.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:34 PM

So when you argue, there are specific time limits? You narrow it down to a few years, and not general history?
Kind of like the GWA and temps, they only need 10 years to determine a geo history of global warming…you take a few years and decide that is how the Republicans are?
Then one can take a few minutes of Pelosi, Reid, Weiner, oh, how about Edwards, or Obama when his is smoking and drinking, those few minutes defines all of his service?
You are one strange debater….you just pull a few dates out of your hat and say, “That is history”…
So, tell me, is Obama going to close Gitmo? Is he going to go “line by line” and veto? Not hire lobbyists? Or where those “dates” not in your timeline.
HAHAHAHAHA! You crack me up…every 14 years, after the harvest of the corn, and before the first snow, the Republicans are more hawkish….

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:43 PM

By the way, you should read the Soviet Constitution one day … I think it’ll sound familiar to you. The democrats are already very familiar with it … in fact they’re trying to copy it.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:39 PM

This one?

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 1:44 PM

I don’t think communism (or whatever you would define as “statism”( is a great deal you moron. Just like you don’t think Communism is a great deal.
crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Statism:

The practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government control over economic planning and policy.

That definition covers just about most of the ideologies we’ve discussed – Statism, Socialism,Progressivism,Fascism, Marxism,Collectivism,Leninism,Stalinism,..

The bottom line with all is the government controlling the economy and the people, whether it’s by the government owning the means of production or simply tightly controlling the means of production, the result is the same.

Now, if you are a proponent of this type of system, I would like to know why that type of system needs a security apparatus to suppress the populace?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:46 PM

WOW! I’m glad you mentioned that darwin! That is a fascinating document.

ARTICLE 12. In the U.S.S.R. work is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, in accordance with the principle: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.”
The principle applied in the U.S.S.R. is that of socialism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his work.”

Those phrases sound familiar…

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 1:47 PM

So when you argue, there are specific time limits? You narrow it down to a few years, and not general history?
right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:43 PM

Well obviously I’m talking about the Republican party now, and not the Republican party 80 years ago. I’m not talking about “history” or slectively defining “history”…I’m talking about right now. The present. This seems to offend you for some reason.

Again, do you deny that the Republican party is (present tense!) more hawkish than the Democratic party?

If yes, how can you deny my analogy.

I look forward to your dodge/non-reply.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:48 PM

This one?

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Yep … especially this chapter

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:49 PM

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:46 PM

You STILL have not answered my question. Again,

So are you saying Republicans are Nothing like Warmongerer’s of the past (Nazis, Communists) – despite the fact that they have the very same warmonger ideology?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Why can’t you answer this question? Do you agree with Nazis and Communists?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:50 PM

follow the money. I bet it winds up from familiar hands.

Jed_Eckert on March 2, 2010 at 1:51 PM

Yeah you’ve lost it. Too bad.

Does it bother you that you’re basically the inverse of the “Bush is a fascist” morons from a few years ago?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 11:59 AM

See, I’m more of a libertarian, so I never liked some of the things Bush did either. But he was never a fascist. Regardless I don’t see how claiming that a large, unresponsive government with the power to take most of your wealth and give it to someone else on a whim is at all equivalent to frothing about BOOOOOOSH.

Modern progressives have their roots in Communism and Socialism dude. Visit any university campus and talk to the faculty. This ain’t hard.

I know you’re probably living in a happy moderate left bubble but the militant left is under no such illusions regarding their ideological origins and they are not as fringe as you seem to think they are. I can provide extensive photo evidence. When you’ve got whole major metropolitan cities serving as echo chambers for that view point you’ve passed “fringe” and made your way into “distinct political faction.”

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 1:54 PM

Again, do you deny that the Republican party is (present tense!) more hawkish than the Democratic party?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:48 PM

The Republican party shouldn’t defend the nation? You miss the entire point. The Republican party hasn’t changed … the democrat party has. The democrats used to be very strong on national defense, just as the Republicans were. In fact, national defense wasn’t even an issue … both parties naturally assumed that was an inherent part of the job.

Today’s democrats don’t. The Republicans haven’t become more hawkish … it’s just that the democrats don’t want to defend the nation.

Why is that you ask? Because they agree more with the ideology of our enemies than they do with individual freedom and life, liberty and the puruit of happiness.
Get it?

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:55 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:50 PM

Since you seem to be an expert on Progressives.

Maybe you can explain Why Progressive utopias like the old Soviet union needed security apparatus like the Cheka to repress the populace?

Why can’t you answer my original question?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:57 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:50 PM

Since you seem to be an expert on Progressives.
Maybe you can explain Why Progressive utopias like the old Soviet union needed security apparatus like the Cheka to repress the populace?

Why can’t you answer my original question?

Whoops, forgot this little gem:

I look forward to your dodge/non-reply.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM

Today’s democrats don’t. The Republicans haven’t become more hawkish … it’s just that the democrats don’t want to defend the nation.
darwin on March 2, 2010 at 1:55 PM

Notice how the warmonger darwin co-opts the language and tactics of fascists. He demonizes his political adversaries by saying they don’t want to “defend the nation”, and they agree with our “enemies”. And darwin supports perpetual, preemptive wars, just like the fascists. He believes in miltary action over diplomacy just like the fascists.

Very revealing.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM

So yeah, your whole premise is completely bs.

I’m going to categorize Nazis, Communists as “war-mongerers”. Because of the Republican Party’s relatively hawkish stance, I’ll also include them under ideological umbrella of “war-mongerers”.

So are you saying Republicans Nothing like Warmongerer’s of the past – despite the fact that they have the very same warmonger ideology?

See how that works?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM

Except that the individualism – collectivism axis of cultural psychology is a well known and often studied phenomenon. You can find a large volume of peer-reviewed research on it (and those guys will at least release their data).

Individuals outside of tightly defined norms don’t fare well in collectivist cultures. Sadly this usually includes great artists and innovators.

When you let collectivists control government – even for the best of reasons (and I think most liberals do it because they want to help people and think that no one but the federal government will) – the trend does drift toward authoritarian systems. It has to, because inevitably somebody won’t want to tow the collective line and help whatever the flavor of the month downtrodden group happens to be.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM

Except that the individualism – collectivism axis of cultural psychology is a well known and often studied phenomenon. You can find a large volume of peer-reviewed research on it (and those guys will at least release their data).

Well frankly it’s not a very useful distinction if it allows you to view Russia under Stalin and the U.S. under Clinton and/or Obama has comparable. Just like the warmonger categorization isn’t useful because it equates completely disparate regimes.

I’m seriously disappointed in you. You generally were a great deal more sensible than the darwinprogressoverpeacechipdaesleeper horde.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM

Well frankly it’s not a very useful distinction if it allows you to view Russia under Stalin and the U.S. under Clinton and/or Obama has comparable

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM

I’m going to categorize Nazis, Communists as “war-mongerers”. Because of the Republican Party’s relatively hawkish stance, I’ll also include them under ideological umbrella of “war-mongerers”.

According to history, and not opinion, the Nazis were responsible for well over 6 million deaths.

According to the Black Book of Communism, not opinion, the Soviet communists were responsible for over 75 million deaths, not including those who died from WWII. And let’s not even include China, Cuba, Vietnam, etc., etc.

I’m going to categorize Nazis and Soviet Communists as “socialist murderers.” (It’s in parentheses so no sweat, right?) Because of Democrat’s relatively “socialist” stance, I’ll… well, I won’t use your sort of logic to reach any conclusions.

karl9000 on March 2, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Notice how the warmonger darwin co-opts the language and tactics of fascists. He demonizes his political adversaries by saying they don’t want to “defend the nation”, and they agree with our “enemies”. And darwin supports perpetual, preemptive wars, just like the fascists. He believes in miltary action over diplomacy just like the fascists.

Very revealing.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM

That’s a pretty nonsensical statement. It reveals more about you than anything else.

Look, I’m sorry to rock your little carefully crafted world, but you don’t have to believe me … just read history. Read the history of both parties. Read about Wilson, Roosevelt, learn the history of the progressive movement.

Don’t listen to anyone … read history.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:07 PM

I’m going to categorize Nazis and Soviet Communists as “socialist murderers.” (It’s in parentheses so no sweat, right?) Because of Democrat’s relatively “socialist” stance, I’ll… well, I won’t use your sort of logic to reach any conclusions.

karl9000 on March 2, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Well actually I was using Chip’s logic. And Chip’s logic is stupid. Which is why what you just wrote is stupid.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Look, I’m sorry to rock your little carefully crafted world, but you don’t have to believe me … just read history. Read the history of both parties. Read about Wilson, Roosevelt, learn the history of the progressive movement.

Don’t listen to anyone … read history.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:07 PM

Indeed. If you examine the history..it’s all spelled out. Olicarh.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:10 PM

I’m going to categorize Nazis and Soviet Communists as “socialist murderers.” (It’s in parentheses so no sweat, right?) Because of Democrat’s relatively “socialist” stance, I’ll… well, I won’t use your sort of logic to reach any conclusions.
karl9000 on March 2, 2010 at 2:06 PM

I wouldn’t worry about that, as crr6 can readily tell you: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

Meant:National Socialist German Workers Party

So Socialist covers that all.

My question continues to be : Why did a “worker’s Paradise” like the old Soviet union needed security apparatus like the Cheka to repress the populace?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:13 PM

That should be:
My question continues to be : Why did a “worker’s Paradise” like the old Soviet union need a security apparatus like the Cheka to repress the populace?

And of course:

I look forward to your dodge/non-reply.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

Why can’t you answer this question? Do you agree with Nazis and Communists?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:50 PM

The total state is the enemy of liberty. European style socialism just gets you there slower than out and out Communism.

I can see the trajectory of places like the UK. I’ve gone there enough times to see people slowly losing basics, like the right to defend themselves.

We can argue that they’ve got an entirely different constitution, but I don’t think they’re really that different than we are. Add to this that collectivists have a demonstrated ability to adjust the meaning of documents based on the collective’s desired reality rather than any objective yardstick. The Constitution is a “living document” don’tcha know.

I’m not screaming BOOOOOOOSH or OBAAAMAAAAAA at the top of my lungs while waving paper mache puppet heads. Just noting that decent folk can create the conditions to crush individuals by making the state the vehicle of their morality. When you make a powerful state it can turn on you really quickly, and if it’s large enough no amount of voting will really create the change you’d like to see when the people causing the problems aren’t even accountable to elections.

The last administration did some horrible and intrusive stuff too, but that doesn’t give this administration and pass to make it even worse.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

I look forward to your dodge/non-reply.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

I look forward to cognizable question.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Indeed. If you examine the history..it’s all spelled out. Olicarh.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:10 PM

Yes, it is all spelled out. Your choice … either ignore it, or repeat it.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Yes, it is all spelled out. Your choice … either ignore it, or repeat it.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Heh. Your new name is “Beck-bot”.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:21 PM

Well frankly it’s not a very useful distinction if it allows you to view Russia under Stalin and the U.S. under Clinton and/or Obama has comparable. Just like the warmonger categorization isn’t useful because it equates completely disparate regimes.

I’m seriously disappointed in you. You generally were a great deal more sensible than the darwinprogressoverpeacechipdaesleeper horde.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM

The two regimes aren’t equivalent just like saber tooth tigers and house cats aren’t equivalent.

But they’re of a kind, and they can experience similar problems. It’s only a matter of scale. And if the scales become similar well … let’s just say that a 500 pound housecat might well kill you just as dead as the aforementioned tiger.

You’re trying to tell me that there’s a difference of type and I don’t think so. It’s just scale. And the trend of such systems is inevitably larger. I can point you to hundreds of examples.

Be disappointed if you must, but it matters not unless you address the reasoning.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 2:21 PM

If yes, how can you deny my analogy.

I look forward to your dodge/non-reply.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:48 PM

Do you mean right now, this instant…you have to realize…history is made up of years.
You, of course, used 80 years…Republicans are not more “hawkish”, they are more interested in protection our sovereign state.
Defending oneself is not aggression, or “hawkish”.
I (actually darwin) pointed out that historically dems are more apt to start a war…and the reason is that they are passive and allow aggression to the point where we have to react and defend.
Carter was a perfect example, as was Clinton…allowing the the taking of hostages and their long imprisonment, forced Reagan to take action…thus Kadafi and his being spanked, and after that peace from him…and Clinton allowing things like the Cole and bombings to take place, then Bush had to straighten them out.
But when Republicans are in control…because of their strong defense….we have fewer problems. Walls even come down.
That is like saying a “bouncer” in a night club is looking for a fight…no he is there to deter a fight.
A strong military, a strong presence, a strong leader deters…and historically that has been proven.
But you don’t like history…you want it NOW.
You are concerned about conservatives wanting to defend…now you tell me, what country has the Republicans taken over and controlled? Kuwait?
You are a foolish weak man/woman, and one that we conservatives are doomed to protect forever….such is our lot in life, protecting the meek sheep.

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Heh. Your new name is “Beck-bot”.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:21 PM

Thanks! Beck knows his stuff. Rarely can anyone question his facts.

I shall refer to you as Commie-bot.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Why did a “worker’s Paradise” like the old Soviet union need a security apparatus like the Cheka to repress the populace?

Okay, so you can’t understand that simple question even though I’ve revised it several times?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM

I look forward to your cognizable question.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Geez. Typo-mania today.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:10 PM

Yeah, Glenn Beck can be pretty stupid, and, actually so can Sara Palin. But, they’re both paid pretty well, so I wouldn’t say they’re morons. And neither of them holds political office…

Speaking of morons, though, let’s play a litle Gumpian “Stupid Is As Stupid Does”:

Obmacare- It’s completely, utterly toast. The Oministry keeps trying to bluff, and then draws four cards. It’s like playing a retar…

Cap and Trade- It’s completely, utterly toast. It’s like the Oministry stepped up to the rail at the track and decided to bet on one of the handler nags leading a thoroughbred to the gates. It’s the inverse of jackass truther logic. The Oministry is actually so retar… they don’t understand a conspiracy of thousands ain’t gonna work; Corky always spills the beans.

Card Check- It’s completely, utterly toast. And Government Motards couldn’t sell acooter to Corky.

Patriot Act- Brilliant legislation from the previous adminstration that, like pretty much like all of previous warfighting policies (especially that “surge” idea), keeps getting perpetuated.

I don’t know kid, seems to me you’re the cheerleader for stupid.

Doorgunner on March 2, 2010 at 2:26 PM

Thanks! Beck knows his stuff. Rarely can anyone question his facts.

I shall refer to you as Commie-bot.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM

That’s exactly what a Beck-bot would call me I suppose ; )

Okay, so you can’t understand that simple question even though I’ve revised it several times?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM

I’ve answered it at least 3 times. Seriously “Chip”, get with the program.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:26 PM

I’ve answered it at least 3 times.
crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:26 PM

Where?
You’ve dodged several times, but never given a straight answer.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

The two regimes aren’t equivalent just like saber tooth tigers and house cats aren’t equivalent.

But they’re of a kind, and they can experience similar problems. It’s only a matter of scale. And if the scales become similar well … let’s just say that a 500 pound housecat might well kill you just as dead as the aforementioned tiger.

You’re trying to tell me that there’s a difference of type and I don’t think so. It’s just scale. And the trend of such systems is inevitably larger. I can point you to hundreds of examples.

Be disappointed if you must, but it matters not unless you address the reasoning.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 2:21 PM

Well, let’s say I grant your points. You can go ahead and worry about a house cat growing to 500 pounds. But don’t be surprised when people begin to think you’re a bit unhinged.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

Notice how the warmonger darwin co-opts the language and tactics of fascists. He demonizes his political adversaries
Very revealing.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM

Now put your name in there and see how you demonize…you don’t see that?
Very revealing….
warmonger
facists
and you don’t see the hypocrisy?
Like I said…you crack me up…the faux indignation, while attacking is hilarious.
Keep posting, you are F’in brilliant…

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 2:30 PM

Where?
You’ve dodged several times, but never given a straight answer.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

Why did the Soviet Union suppress it’s own population? Because it was an awful, evil, authoritarian regime.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:30 PM

Well actually I was using Chip’s logic. And Chip’s logic is stupid. Which is why what you just wrote is stupid.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:08 PM

That’s great: you’re calling me stupid because Chip links Progressives to Soviets?

That’s … what’s that word you used?

karl9000 on March 2, 2010 at 2:31 PM

Dude, this is simply a repackaged version of your hair color comparison.

Yep. And it’s also a repackaged version of your “statist” comparison.

Why can’t you discuss real ideology?

Foreign policy hawkishness isn’t relevant to “ideology”?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:32 PM

Why did the Soviet Union suppress it’s own population? Because it was an awful, evil, authoritarian regime.
crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:30 PM

Why did it have to suppress it’s own population?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Why did it have to suppress it’s own population?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Because it was an awful, evil, authoritarian regime. Did you miss that in my original post?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:35 PM

That’s great: you’re calling me stupid because Chip links Progressives to Soviets?
That’s … what’s that word you used?
karl9000 on March 2, 2010 at 2:31 PM

The comparison is between Progressives and Socialists.
As in the: Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics
And the: National Socialist German Workers Party.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Foreign policy hawkishness isn’t relevant to “ideology”?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:32 PM

“Hawkishness” is defined as how? Because prior to Iraq, democrats were constantly harping on the dangers of Saddam and how he must be removed from power in addition to the fear of his WMDs. So accordingly, democrats can be defined as “hawkish”.

Once Bush went into Iraq they suddenly had memory loss, so did the media.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Why did it have to suppress it’s own population?
Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Because it was an awful, evil, authoritarian regime. Did you miss that in my original post?
crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:35 PM

So are you saying that Socialists will Progress to being “awful, evil, authoritarian regimes?”

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:41 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

Honestly, I think you are getting better…this is the longest you have posted with out being completely humiliated to the point of not answering and running away.
Of course you are stuck on one word…warmonger…but you are rather cute today.
But you are about to be ran off, because your arguments have very little facts, and more emotion.
Hang in there, you may break your record…before becoming totally humiliated and disgraced.
Thanks for the great laughs….you are F’in brilliant….

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 2:43 PM

Because it was an awful, evil, authoritarian regime. Did you miss that in my original post?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:35 PM

Then why are the democrats trying to duplicate everything they did? When I said read the Soviet Constitution I was serious. Everything the democrats want to accomplish is spelled out almost verbatim in Soviet Constitution, especially the chapter on the rights and freedoms of the Soviet citizen.

Read it.

In fact, go to the Communist Party USA website and see if you can spot any differences between them and today’s democrats.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM

So are you saying that Socialists will Progress to being “awful, evil, authoritarian regimes?”

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:41 PM

Uh, no. European has been what you would define as “socialist” for upwards of 70-80 years. Yet many of those countries garner higher human rights and quality-of life ratings than we do.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Yet many of those countries garner higher human rights and quality-of life ratings than we do.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM

What could be a higher “human right” than individual freedom and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

With each additional government entitlement, a little more liberty is stripped away. Eventually there’s none left. Of course if you had read any history at all you’d know that.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 2:49 PM

So are you saying that Socialists will Progress to being “awful, evil, authoritarian regimes?”
Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:41 PM

Uh, no. European has been what you would define as “socialist” for upwards of 70-80 years. Yet many of those countries garner higher human rights and quality-of life ratings than we do.
crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Only because we’ve propped them up with defense spending.
Are you familiar with what is happening in Greece?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:54 PM

Are you familiar with what is happening in Greece?

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 2:54 PM

Dude. I was living in Europe during September of 2008. People were asking, “my God, are you familiar with what is happening in the United States?”

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM

That socialist paradise of 70′s Britain was mighty impressive.

FinA you are so completely driven by your ideology that reality be damned if it would make a tiny scuff on your impenetrable ignorance. But I guess that is also the definition of a good comrade. da?

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

FinA you are so completely driven by your ideology that reality be damned if it would make a tiny scuff on your impenetrable ignorance.

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Pot, meet kettle Beck-bot.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Honestly, I think you are getting better…this is the longest you have posted with out being completely humiliated to the point of not answering and running away.

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 2:43 PM

You probably wouldn’t need to make such grandiose claims if victory if what you said were actually true.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:13 PM

Well, let’s say I grant your points. You can go ahead and worry about a house cat growing to 500 pounds. But don’t be surprised when people begin to think you’re a bit unhinged.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

See, this right here is why I say that liberals think too highly of human nature.

What you’re telling me, having granted my points, is that given the opportunity to expand their power, politicians will consistently and voluntarily choose not to do so … because they’re all good people, I guess? Maybe you think the voters who are starting to get a little bread and circus action will be willing to give it up?

From what I can tell, people who get power like that try to get more. Without the competition of market forces (or even elections in some cases) there’s precious little to retard that temptation but their own consciences.

You’d be amazed how much bad behavior people will allow under the right circumstances. You’d be hard pressed to find a better environment for something like that to germinate than a large organization with the stated goal of social justice and the full force of the US Military behind it. Huge corporations have this issue as well, but when they screw up enough they collapse.

The thing is, Enron et al don’t have tanks, jets, and hundreds of thousands of troops with machine guns. The right circumstances can bring a corporation down practically overnight. The same is not true for the United States Government.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Because it was an awful, evil, authoritarian regime. Did you miss that in my original post?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 2:35 PM

There’s another question here: Why was that regime awful, evil, and authoritarian? What ideas and impulses allowed it to become that way? What justifications did the leadership make for its actions?

Evil has its genesis somewhere. It’s partly human nature, but given that human nature is present everywhere, it can’t be the deciding factor in what leads to these monstrosities.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Pot, meet kettle Beck-bot.

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:10 PM

I don’t watch Beck or listen to his radio programme! Thanks for confessing your ignorance…again.

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:26 PM

This is what strikes me in all of this. The very first tea party I ever went to was held outside in a park. They had a few random speakers, mostly small business owners and a veteran. We arrived late because we had work, there were people coming and going. It took us a while to find out exactly where it was because there were no signs saying “This way” and it was being held in a public park. I think what shocked me the most is I wasn’t the youngest one there and my parents weren’t the oldest ones there. There were people holding signs they’d made and there were quite a few people that were holding giant American flags. They were all standing there, just listening. At the end they had a table that was set up that had sign up sheets. They didn’t have enough paper. They were not prepared for the response.
The people of the coffee party strike me as the type that would show up at one of their meetings with TOO much paper and TOO many things. If you want my major take on the difference between the two is that the tea party was a humble movement started on “we are the people” that gradually transformed into “WE ARE THE PEOPLE!!” The coffee party seems to be founded on an egocentric “I am the people”

Ingenue on March 2, 2010 at 3:28 PM

I don’t watch Beck or listen to his radio programme! Thanks for confessing your ignorance…again.

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Sorry. Which undistinguishable, random wingnut are you again?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

That’s called a non-sequitur

And you really haven’t answered my question have you?
You’ve, just danced around a dodged.

But most can readily understand WHY a Marxist, Leninist, Fascist, Progressivist, Stalinist,Socialist,Communist, regime would have to suppress it’s own people because these systems’ contradict human nature and they all eventually have to use force to accomplish their goals.

But you can’t answer that because either you don’t see that or don’t want to see that.
And thus you don’t see a flaw in your own ideology.

However, that doesn’t matter to the rest of us and that eventual Change to an “awful, evil, authoritarian regime” is why we resist this Progression towards tyranny.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 3:33 PM

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Sorry. Which undistinguishable, random wingnut are you again?

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM

As long as you dehumanize me to the point that it doesn’t affect your conscience when you send me off to the reeducation/work/death camps. Slur away!

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:35 PM

As long as you dehumanize me to the point that it doesn’t affect your conscience when you send me off to the reeducation/work/death camps. Slur away!

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:35 PM

She’s a Commie-bot and therefore has no conscience. She downloads propaganda from the Commie Borg Mother cube high in orbit.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 3:39 PM

She’s a Commie-bot and therefore has no conscience. She downloads propaganda from the Commie Borg Mother cube high in orbit.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 3:39 PM

I don’t understand the rage against Beck thing or whatever she gets caught up in… I’ve read 6 historical books and biographies this year alone and I don’t watch TV. I’m pretty sure my opinions are my opinions and they are guided by my experience, history, and context. I certainly don’t exist in a Borg environment as every single one of my friends are idiot libs. I would love to have a good friend that was ideologically similar.

Why does she have to lash out at constructs that she creates in her own mind as opposed with dealing in reality? It’s weird. I certainly don’t understand the aversion to ideology that elevates the individual above the collective.

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:46 PM

every single one of my friends are idiot libs.

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:46 PM

You sound like a really good friend.

Proud Rino on March 2, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Why does she have to lash out at constructs that she creates in her own mind as opposed with dealing in reality? It’s weird. I certainly don’t understand the aversion to ideology that elevates the individual above the collective.

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Years of subtle indoctrination will get one to believe bad is good and good is bad.

Without any evidence whatsoever, leftists just assume the United States is inherently evil because why? We are the most productive and freest people in the world? Because people would risking dying just to come here?

No one in their right mind can read history and come to the conclusion that the United States is what leftists claim it is … so I can only conclude the left is literally out of their collective mind.

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 3:52 PM

You sound like a really good friend.

Proud Rino on March 2, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Friends tell the truth. :)

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Without any evidence whatsoever, leftists just assume the United States is inherently evil because why? We are the most productive and freest people in the world? Because people would risking dying just to come here?

darwin on March 2, 2010 at 3:52 PM

There’s definitely an element of that in the Far Left, but come on, that’s like accusing all Tea Partiers of being racist. Just because a couple of nuts hate the USA doesn’t mean every liberal hates the USA.

Also – I’ve read plenty of posts here from people saying they want to secede from the United States, or “go Galt” or whatever, so I’m pretty sure America-hatred isn’t just confined to the Left anyway.

Proud Rino on March 2, 2010 at 3:59 PM

daesleeper on March 2, 2010 at 3:46 PM

That’s just how the Leftists like to demonize their opponents.

You will notice that it is they would parrot the same talking points time and time again and yet accuse the Right of walking in lockstep.

Whether it’s judging Obama solely on the color of his skin and hurling the racism charge, Being National Socialists and accusing the right of being Nazi’s or ginning up fake movements and saying the right is guilty of Astroturfing, it is the Democrats that are truly the “Party of Projection”.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 4:02 PM

Is it true that Ms. Park works/worked for the New York Times?

mjbrooks3 on March 2, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Is it true that Ms. Park works/worked for the New York Times?

mjbrooks3 on March 2, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Check out this post.

http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/03/coffee-party-parasite.html

opusrex on March 2, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Why don’t some of you quit clogging up the system with your crap. Have your argument somewhere else, for Christ’s sake!

LarryG on March 2, 2010 at 4:44 PM

*waits for obligatory wingnutty Jonah-Goldberg-inspired rant on how Nazis were actually all tree-hugging liberals*

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Tree hugging is not a defining position on any scale dealing with governing philosophies. The size and role governments, however, are. It is on the political right were limited and small government exist. The left, owns the larger and central planning side. Thus, the outermost extreme position of each would be 100% totalitarian dictatorships on the left and absolute anarchy on the right.

For any on the right to take your challenge on the correct premise, you will have to decide if Nazi Germany represented more authoritarian or absentee.

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Tree hugging is not a defining position on any scale dealing with governing philosophies. The size and role governments, however, are. It is on the political right were limited and small government exist. The left, owns the larger and central planning side. Thus, the outermost extreme position of each would be 100% totalitarian dictatorships on the left and absolute anarchy on the right.
For any on the right to take your challenge on the correct premise, you will have to decide if Nazi Germany represented more authoritarian or absentee.
anuts on March 2, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Which is why those on the right need to correct the Historical record, as was posted earlier on:

Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NAZI)
Translated to: National Socialist German Workers Party, so despite how the Left would love to pretend that the National Socialist German Workers Party was on the right ( and perhaps trying to say the Communists were as well???) These were both vestiges of the Left.

The Far-Left fringe of the Democrat Party can accurately be described as “National Socialist” – Socialist’s that are part of a National and Nationalizing party.

Chip on March 2, 2010 at 5:23 PM

*waits for obligatory wingnutty Jonah-Goldberg-inspired rant on how Nazis were actually all tree-hugging liberals*

crr6 on March 2, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Tree hugging is not a defining position on any scale dealing with governing philosophies. The size and role governments, however, are. It is on the political right were limited and small government exist. The left, owns the larger and central planning side. Thus, the outermost extreme position of each would be 100% totalitarian dictatorships on the left and absolute anarchy on the right.

For any on the right to take your challenge on the correct premise, you will have to decide if Nazi Germany represented more authoritarian or absentee.

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 5:04 PM

This.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 2, 2010 at 5:32 PM

Covert Operation For Fascist Enterprise Expansion

Kevin in Washington State on March 2, 2010 at 7:47 PM

My God, the left has never had an idea of their own.

Now, they create the Coffee Party attempting to use Ms. Park to emulate the Boss (Ms. Malkin). However, as with everything the left attempts to create as a counter point to U.S. this group will falter as well.

The person to feel sympathy for is Ms. Park who is being told she is more influential than she really is.

MSGTAS on March 3, 2010 at 10:11 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5