There was a great influx of new faces after the 2010 House elections, people who campaigned on not being Washington insiders, having new ideas and an outside-the-Beltway perspective.



That worked out............great.

Oh, but it did work. The Tea Party revolution of 2010 brought....holy cow! The ordinary citizen back to the forefront. Liberals and establishment Republicans alike despise and dismiss the Tea Party because they are a threat to the status quo. What those people call 'crazy' I call 'realists'.

Er, no. Unless you define "working" as "making themselves look terrible and accomplish nothing".

Which I suppose might be the end goal of electing people to offices they don't believe should exist at all.


The ordinary citizens preferred cockroaches to the 112th Congress. Least productive and most disliked in history.


EDIT - What exactly was the "Tea Party Revolution". What changed? Aside from the aforementioned holy cow.

When Harry Reid refuses to allow legislation to pass through, nothing gets accomplished. If any anger should be directed at anybody, it should be at him. Liberals know nothing other than "take, take, take" and "mine, mine, mine", and when you have politicians that benefit off of this - both politically and financially (fun fact: there's far more millionaires in Congress on the left, than there is the right).

Why is that? Simple...Liberal Democrats control nearly every major city and brainwash and pit the less-well off folks against the better off folks because that's how the left consolidates their power. I mean look at these numbskulls....Jerry Brown, Cuomo, Bloomberg, de Blasio....there's a reason why this country is turning into a joke. They also control the media, the entertainment industry, the edumacation system....

The goal is to turn people into drones and keep them naive, because when someone is kept naive, they are able to be controlled with that carrot at the end of the stick.

In regards to the Tea Party, people rose up and elected candidates that they felt represented the individual. I'm for anybody that's anti-political establishment, because those are the nutjobs that are running our society into the ground. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz get deemed as nuts because people are perplexed that these folks have the gall to take on the big money establishment, whether it be Democratic or Republican. And both establishment types go out of their way to smear these folks.

Why? Because they are dangerous. Not to you or me, but to the status quo. Anytime the status quo gets scared, that's a good thing for the ordinary citizen.

Heaven forbid we live in an American society where people are mature enough to make their own choices that benefit - or don't benefit - their daily lives or even be allowed to defend themselves.

In conclusion, the establishment, particularly the left in this country, are systematically destroying it. Social policies are for the most part fantasy. It's divide and conquer....and the folks that fight against that get smeared.

Yep, heard that one before. Everything that's wrong with the country is aways the fault of the "other side". It's just what your opponents do, and they're just as convinced they're right as you are. Me, I don't have a side. Would you care to discuss the subject, or is a tirade the preferred method of communication these days?

Both sides of the aisle have been complicit in the divide and conquer strategy.

Once a politician gets elected, they get indoctrinated to siddown and shaddup.:hmmm: Do your duty with the insider trading scheme and Wall Street will make you and your staff rich beyond the dreams of Avarice.
Once a junior rep gets a taste of that pie they become worthless to those who elected them.

I'm always open to discussion.

Cool. I just tend to get my back up when someone starts blaming the other side for everything. I think it started when I read the 1800 newspaper headline promoting John Adams for re-election: " If Jefferson is elected, murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught and practiced, the air will be rent with the cries of the distressed, the soil will be soaked with blood, and the nation black with crimes."

:haha: Nice touch! If you haven't watched the series on John Adams, I'd highly recommend you do so. Washington didn't believe in political parties, and Adams was a Federalist. I don't have a party designation, but I do kind of consider myself a new-age Federalist.

It's not so much me blaming the 'other side' as I'm neither Democrat or Republican, it's moreso me blaming the status quo. I can relate and respect the Tea Party movement because they're standing up to and directly challenging the status quo, and that's a refreshing concept to see in this day and age.

People disparage these folks because it's almost like they're stunned that people would have the audacity to run against them. In the last couple of cycles, several 'establishment' candidates got bumped out office. I firmly believe in term limits and respect the constitution.

However, the Tea Party gets absolutely blasted at every turn by folks from both sides of the aisle. Labels such as 'crazy' or 'racist'....just silly and unfounded attacks. Why does the establishment attack them? Because they fear the Tea Party. The Tea Party champions truly placing the power back with the individual, and to the establishment, that's dangerous.

If you watched Obama's SOTU speech, basically it was a couple name drops here and there to help with the mid term elections, and the rest of was talking about how he's not getting his way so he'll find a way to get things done whether anybody likes it or not. Case in point, this president is the most dangerous, overreaching ideologue this country has seen in generations. I firmly believe he didn't even want to be president, but was coaxed into it by the powers-at-be after his keynote address at the 2004 DNC because he'd be the perfect tool to further a social agenda that's been on the mind of many egalitarians in this country for a long time.

And I firmly believe that he is doing just that, and because of that, we all are in trouble. Then we have Hillary and Elizabeth Warren potentially running in the next election....I'm genuinely fearful of the road this country is going down. 9/11 was the turning point in this nation's history, and it's all downhill from here.

Watch it? I own a copy. At the same time I'm loving it I also find myself complaining about the things they left out, most of which was so as not to confuse the audience.

Adams a Federalist? Don't tell Hamilton that. By the standards of wanting the Constitution passed, Washington was a federalist (small 'f'), as was Madison. Hamilton supported Adams mainly to keep Jefferson, whom he hated, at bay. Adams accepted Federalist aid, but once in office he was quite independent. Once Adams did things Hamilton didn't like, Adams was suddenly no more Federalist than Washington or Jefferson.

Fair enough. I don't like Obama myself, but when I see people blaming him for anything and everything I just have to say something.

Ultra Liberals hate the Tea Party because at heart the party is still quite conservative. Hardcore Republicans hate the tea party because the party is stealing some of their thunder. That seems fairly obvious to me. Both sides hate the fact that there is a third party which has actually gained some momentum. That's the status quo that's really being disrupted, and most of us are resistant to change.

The bad news for the Tea Party is that they really aren't organized or centralized. This makes it easy for the party's fringe elements to engage in questionable activities, and it makes it easy for opponents to blame those activities on the party itself.

Possibly, but the losing side of every election for the past two hundred years has said the same thing.

I didn't know much about Adams until watching the series really sparked my interest in him. The feuds between those men are very entertaining to read about. With Aaron Burr right in the thick of things too. :know:

Those guys (all of them) have always been a particular favorite subject of mine. My favorite part of the series was Laura Linney's portrayal of Abigail. Of course there wasn't an actor in the show I didn't like. Have you seen the old George Washington miniseries with Barry Bostwick and Patty Duke. It has some flaws, and it has a completely different flavor than John Adams, but it is well worth seeing. Also there's Sally Hemings: An American Scandal, which takes some extreme historical liberties and speculates quite a bit, but in my estimation Sam Neill gives the best characterization of Jefferson ever, which makes it well worth seeing. It also has Mario van Peebles as James Hemings, Rene Auberjonois as James Callender and Mare Winningham as Jefferson's daughter Martha. Overall worth seeing.