This is not the same Democratic Party we grew up with.
I did not leave the Democratic Party.
They left me.
The entire Democratic Party is loaded with "Progressives" who are nothing but Marxist, Socialists, Communists, Maoists , etc. They are as far extreme left as possble. That is why no bill can get thru Senate. So many Left Wing Extremist that they are unappraochable.
party (424)
http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/racepolitics_research2011.html
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2011/48_say_their_views_closer_to_tea_party_than_congress
TEA Party Voters Constitute
a Different Breed of Conservative
Wiser Research and Rasmussen Reports recently published new polls with intriguing depictions of TEA Party voters and society’s perceptions of them . . . . Of course, literally hundreds of surveys about the TEA Party have been conducted. Dozens more comparing TEA (“Taxed Enough Already” or “Taken Enough Abuse”) Party folks to typical conservatives or to typical Americans, typical Republicans or to Independents have also been done in the last year. Some of the most common claims of the mainstream media about the TEA Party were absolutely and quickly refuted by the mainstream polling organizations . . . the following “generic” poll information comes from numerous surveys on the subject which will be followed by the two recent and more specific surveys about the TEA folk from Rasmussen Reports; and Wiser Research . . . we’ll look far more closely at the Rasmussen and Wiser data. Here are the conclusions about the make up of the TEA Party that can be drawn from mainstream research thus far:
1) TEA Pary members were not stupid as liberal pundits suggested, but more highly educated than the general populace and than other conservatives.
2) They were not racists, but less likely to be hold racist views than the general populace.
3) They were more likely to be older than 45.
4) The other demographics of the TEA Party vary somewhat from region to region. However, in general they are older -- more than 150% as likely to be over 65 as under age 28. Men outnumbered women by about 56-44 among TEA Partiers. Blacks and Hispanics are represented among the TEA Party but around 50% less frequently than found in the general populace for both groups. Catholics are found among the TEA Party about 30% less frequently than in the general populace; Jews are found about 60% less frequently than among the general populace. Asians are found at about 10% less often than in the general populace. TEA Party events are often family events for younger couples that are involved.
5) TEA Partiers are more likely to be successful and enjoy higher earnings.
6) More likely to own a business or represent a profession such as doctor, architect, engineer, computer-programmer etc. than the general public.
7) The mainstream media were right about one thing: TEA Partiers were far more likely to watch FOXNews regularly and far more likely to question the “fairness” of other popular media sources of information such as the traditional broadcast networks.
8) They come from all over the political spectrum but typically described themselves as Republicans 54% of the time; as Independents or “Other” 28%; as Democrats 12%; and as Libertarians 6%.
9) Despite efforts to portray them as extremists, recent surveys show that 47% of the voters regard their own views as closer to the TEA Party then to those of our representatives or senators and 54% say the TEA Party views are closer to theirs than what they perceive to be the views of President Obama.
10) TEA Party people are far more likely than other voters to call themselves “Fiscal-Conservatives”; “Constitutional-Conservatives”; or “Libertarians.”
11) TEA Party people are far more likely to describe themselves as “well-informed on the issues” than regular conservatives 58% to 41% and than the general public where only 30% agreed with that self-description.
12) While studies by groups like the Huffington post seem to aim at portraying TEA Partiers as “trailer trash” and “100% sold on” the Republican Party: TEA Partiers “perhaps because of their age” come from a higher than average income levels and largely describe themselves as previously “inactive” politically.
13) Perhaps because of their age, TEA Party members are more likely than members of the general public to have owned or managed a business or to have served in managerial positions than the general public.
14) TEA Partiers are more likely to regard themselves as “very well-informed politically” and “economically” than the general public. About 78% of them agree with the statement “Lower taxes creates jobs.”
15) The single-most consistent aspect of the TEA Party that everyone agrees upon is that they are overwhelmingly conservative. Studies have shown that only 6-10% of TEA Partiers consider themselves “liberal” and only 22-25% consider themselves to have “centrist” political views. When the word “moderate” is used, however, a large amount of the TEA Party considers themselves to be fiscally-conservative moderates.
16) Under-represented professions among TEA Partiers include teachers and lawyers. Union involvement is found, but less than among average voters. Many are involved in the computer industry or information technology.
17) TEA Party people are far LESS likely to describe themselves as “Socially-Conservative” and more likely to call themselves “Social- Moderates” or even “Social-liberals” than regular conservatives. They are far less likely to think that total bans on abortion; absolute right to prayer in public schools; teaching creationism in public schools; or gun control are “major issues at this time” and far more likely to point to debt; jobs; runaway government spending; and expansion of government as the most serious issues of our day. While both types of conservatives are highly likely to oppose gay marriage, TEA Party conservatives are more likely to approve of or be neutral toward the gay lifestyle. These numbers and attitudes have been fairly consistent for the last year regardless of who’s doing the polling.
18) While we’ve seen no polling data on this, Rajjpuut has done a lot of “informal polling” and would describe the “level of violence” found at TEA Party demonstrations (perhaps in keeping with their age) as “virtually non-existent” especially compared with that of the left-wing activist and Union activist demonstrations he’s seen. Similarly examining the “rhetoric” found on signs at such demonstrations shows the TEA Party placards generally “staying on topic” and complaining about policies and events in comparison to left-wing activism (say in Wisconsin) as vitriolic and often aimed at personalities . . . which is diametrically opposed to the viewpoints expressed by mainstream pundits characterizing the two groups.
The only “violence” ever seen by Rajjpuut at a TEA Party event was when someone tried to infiltrate a TEA Party group (with photographers in tow) bearing a racist reference to Obama. The young man was physically conducted off the premises by four athletic-looking young TEA Party men and his racist sign destroyed completely. The mainstream media didn’t cover that on the nightly news, however. That’s concludes our broad outline of who the TEA Party is . . . .
http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/racepolitics_research2011.html
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2011/48_say_their_views_closer_to_tea_party_than_congress
In the two surveys linked above, the pollsters zeroed in on some specific beliefs or specific impact of TEA Party conservatives compared to regular conservatives. The second link is to a recent Rasmussen Reports poll on the TEA Party which tracks the public perception of TEA Partiers very closely. The top link from Wiser Research really aimed to zoom in on a few areas where the TEA Party is claimed by the media to be “more extreme” than Republicans or other conservatives.
Rasmussen leads off his poll with this comment: “In the ongoing budget-cutting debate in Washington, some congressional Democrats have accused their Republican opponents of being ‘held captive’ by the Tea Party movement, but voters identified with the Tea Party more than Congress. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters say when it comes to the major issues facing the country, their views are closer to the average Tea Party member as opposed to the average member of Congress. Just 22% say their views are closer to those of the average congressman. Even more (30%) aren’t sure.”
Results of the Rasmussen polling added that 49% of likely voters see the TEA Party movement as “good for the country; while 26% see it as bad for the country; and 16% see the TEA Party as a neutral entity neither good nor bad. 78% of Republicans and 54% of Independents see the TEA Party as good for the country; while 48% of Democrats see it as bad for the country. 45% of likely voters believe the average TEA Party member has a better understanding of the problems (and their solutions?) facing the country than the average member of congress; while only 31% see the average member of congress having a better understanding.
At present 22% of the populace claim they are part of the TEA Party movement; 12% say that someone close to them is a TEA Party Member; and 14% say they aren’t sure. 94% of the political-class have no ties to the TEA Party and 69% of the political class believe the TEA Party is a bad thing. (Over the years depending upon the economy, between 6-15% of voters identify themselves as part of the political class by their answers to three specific questions from Rasmussen pollers, while 54-70% respond to those same three questions in keeping with “mainstream” views. 59% of mainstream voters see the TEA Party as good for the country.
The Rasmussen Reports poll concludes saying, “41% of all voters think the Tea Party will play a bigger role in the 2012 election campaigns than it did in 2010; 30% see the TEA Party’s role “about the same”; while 21% say they expect a smaller role in 2012. Voters see the words “Tea Party” a bit more positively as a political label these days, while the terms “liberal” and “progressive” have lost ground even among Democrats. “Conservative” remains the most popular description. While Rasmussen has earned a reputation for professionalism and accuracy and beaten all other polling groups in predicting the final vote percentages over the last three presidential election cycles . . . some have claimed that Rasmussen is “conservative-leaning.” For balance we’ll look at a recent poll on the TEA Party conducted by a supposedly independent and neutral survey group: Wiser Research . . . .
In the Wiser Research the survey concluded that it appears that there is “an emerging split among conservatives” and asked “how will this affect Republicans in 2012?” While admiring the polling’s ingenuity, Rajjpuut finds such conclusions, highly questionable largely because of the way the polling was conducted. Wiser sought responses to opinion statements from regular conservatives and from TEA Party conservatives and then sought to assess the differences in response. Since Wiser was looking for differences, it’s not at all surprising that they found them. Rajjpuut’s totally different conclusions are found below; here are the Wiser opinion-generating statements:
A) “Barack Obama is destroying the country.”
B) “Obama is a socialist.”
C) “I want to see Obama’s policies fail.”
D) “Obama is a practicing Christian/Muslim.”
E) “Obama does not have a U.S. birth certificate.”
As stated above, Wiser Research was looking for differences and found them. Except for the first three questions, however, they got a lot of “not sure” responses. Across the board the TEA Party members were more likely to agree with the statements and to believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim than regular conservatives were. First let’s look at those responses according to Wiser:
A) “Barack Obama is destroying the country” elicited a huge difference between regular conservatives and the TEA Party. 6% of regular conservatives agreed with the statement while 71% of TEA Party Conservatives agreed.
B) “Obama is a Socialist” showed another great divide, but not quite so marked this time: 75% of the TEA Party members believe Obama is a Socialist compared to 40% of regular conservatives.
C) “I want to see Obama’s policies fail” was agreed to by 76% of TEA Partiers, but only by 32% of non-TEA Party conservatives.
D) “Obama is a practicing Muslim” was agreed to by 27% of the TEA Party and 16% of other conservatives; and the corollary “Obama is a practicing Christian” was agreed to again by 27% of TEA Partiers; but 46% of other conservatives. Note: Among all voters various studies have shown that Obama is considered a Muslim by roughly 16% of the populace.
E) “Obama does not have a U.S. birth certificate” garnered 26% agreement from the TEA Party but only 17% from other conservatives. Note: study after study have shown that 18-20% of all American voters believe the president cannot produce a legitimate American birth certificate and that independents are far more likely than Democrats and only slightly less likely than Republicans to believe this is true.
The “self-fulfilling prophecy” aspect of human affairs (and human polling) has been documented for at least the last eighty years -- we tend to find what we expect to find and the truth be damned. Rajjpuut sees these Wiser numbers, especially in response to the first statement, to be far, far out of line with reality as he or anyone he knows has experienced it. He’d daresay that it would be impossible to find any group of self-described conservatives anywhere who’d respond to the statement “Barack Obama is destroying the country” with less than 30% agreement. If the statement was rephrased, “The policies of Barack Obama are destroying the country,” than it’s doubtful that less than 60% agreement could be found among any group of self-described conservatives in America. What exactly is this “opinion” of Rajjpuut based upon?
A) Despite attempts to portray America as a racist nation, Barack Obama got more White votes than John Kerry or Al Gore. Almost 48% of White voters supported him. In contrast less than 5% of Black vote backed McCain . . . racism, seems to come from the other direction or should we call it Black backlash?
B) Barack Obama got a huge benefit of the doubt after his election in 2008. 72% of Americans approved of his performance when polled on Inauguration Day including 45% who highly approved (in contrast only 15% of Americans highly disapproved of Obama’s performance at that time). Rajjpuut backed “the lesser of two evils” McCain-Palin ticket; but admits feeling good about the country electing a Black man as its president. Unfortunately, that feeling was gone within six weeks . . . .
C) Things have changed for Mr. Obama, his level of support has fallen dramatically. Mr. Obama didn’t somehow get “blacker” or otherwise racially objectional overnight; nor did White voters suddenly become more racist. Mr. Obama’s policies quite frankly and simply are hurting the country and the voters have noticed and become angry or at least disappointed about that.
As everyone knows, the honeymoon was over rather quickly. Almost immediately Obama’s actions made it clear that the man practiced highly dubious politics, especially his economic actions and policies. By mid-March of 2009, the TEA Party had arisen out of nowhere in objection to government policies these individuals regarded as anti-American; socialistic; anti-common sense; anti-Constitutional and expansive. That Barack Obama was at the center of these policies was obvious to all . . . so once the political opposition arose, it’s natural that he, personally, would be the center of the debate.
Again, if the statement “Barack Obama’s policies are destroying this country” had been used, it’s likely that very little rift would have been shown between conservatives. The TEA Party arose first against Mr. Obama’s policies while the entire nation didn’t think about repudiating them until a couple months before the last election. With eighteen extra months to crystallize their understanding, it’s natural that the TEA Party would be slightly more likely to see Obama as personally responsible. Rajjpuut would prefer not to impugn the motives of Wiser Research, but clearly sloppy interview technique and dubious methodology seem to be involved.
The task that Wiser Research took upon itself: to find major differences between TEA Party conservatives compared to all conservatives seems to have shown success. However, since in study after study . . . conservatives of all ilks regard protecting the Constitution and American Way of Life; growing the economy; stopping the growth in government; creating a balanced budget; dealing with the National Debt and unfunded liabilities; and ethics in government as the most important issues of our day -- and TEA Party conservatives have consistently shown themselves the most adamant in desiring the government to face up to these issues . . . .
The Wiser Research study’s final conclusions that a rift is developing between Republicans (notice their research was on self-identified “conservatives,” but their conclusion talks about Republicans) and the TEA Party may be of little import since currently fiscal-conservativism and Constitutional-conservativism seems to be the driving impetus of the broader electorate. IF such a wide rift actually exists it’s not likely to manifest itself when such a huge area of “easy” agreement lies before the two groups and the general voting public as well. Additionally, the central fallacy of the Wiser Research conclusion emerges from their polling technique in which clearly Barack Obama (and not his policies specifically; or progressive political policies in general) was the focal point. So long as the man’s policies are seen as antithetical to conservative values, no rift matters.
The one key finding of the Wiser study (that the TEA Party believes more strongly that “Obama is destroying the country” by a ratio of 71% to 6% over ordinary conservatives) puts their whole study in question in Rajjpuut’s mind until it can be replicated by a more respected polling organization. When it is further revealed that Wiser comes to this conclusion and another conclusion (from a different study) that the TEA Party harbors more racial resentment than other conservatives – something none of the other more accredited studies has ever shown . . . one cannot be blamed for suggesting that it looks likes Wiser went out of its way 1) to back the Obama administration’s “party line” about the largely “unsavory” nature of the TEA Party and 2) actually attempted to incite a rift amongs conservative voters which could only benefit Barack Obama. Rajjpuut would suggest that Rasmussen and other more respected polling outfits take up this Wiser study and conduct a similar one of their own. The numbers 71% and 6%, however, are so out of line with real life that, as mentioned, the whole Wiser study is made suspect.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
Please go to the National Tea Party Fund LLC web-site. They have the FIRST TEA PARTY FLAG!
Go to: National Tea Party Fund. Com
by: Trent Derr - Morning in America
As I mentioned to some friends, due to the amount of money the President is borrowing from the Chinese, Obama is no longer able to refer to the Chinese leader as Hu Jintao. Now Obama is required to call him Hu JaDaddy. To paraphrase Jay Leno, the bad news is the Chinese Leader came to the White House this week. The good news is he said we could keep it.
However I’m not picking on the Chinese. I’m opposed to the United States owing that amount of money to anyone. Let alone a country that crushes dissent in their citizens, imprisons their Noble Prize winners, thinks that America is a temporary aberration in history, and has nuclear weapons pointed at us. In any debtor relationship, you lose authority and the ability to negotiate from a level playing field. Anyone who doesn’t think it matters where you borrow money is a fool. Just ask a person who has ended up in “cement shoes” in the waters off of New Jersey whether it matters. But I digress…
Personally, I’m not as concerned about what our debt to China says about them as what is says about us. The reckless increased spending by the Obama Administration is not primarily being driven by building infrastructure, fighting a war, or funding social security. Continue...
Sunday January 30th 2011
Todd Platts lies to his constituent
The York Sunday News reported that once again Todd Platts PA-19 proposes legislation for Congressional Term Limits. However like every time before, this bill has no chance of passing. Todd Platts has again shown that he is all show. The York Sunday News quoted Mr. Platts as saying that he will probably run for a seventh term in direct reversal of his Campaign Promise that he would self induce term limits even if he doesn't get the legislation passed.
The electorate in York and Adams Counties have a long history of pitching out of office those politicians like Todd Platts that have reached the 12 year maximum.
Not long ago Mr. Platts voted for "Special Rights" for Gays, in addition to allowing Gays to serve openly in the military. Both are an affront to the direction his constituents wished. As Joe Biden stated, This is a path to allowing Gay Marriage.
The Platts Hate Crime bill punishes your priest, rabbi, or minister for speaking the truth about homosexuality.
It's time to send Platts home!
Check out my Blog above link, to see my daily blog posts for the Atlanta Tea Party Examiner.com
"The tea party's success has drawn hundreds of politicians and groups seeking to fasten themselves to the movement, steer it and speak for it. Millions of dollars have flowed in from corporations and rich donors, all of whom have their own ideas about what the tea party should be. This struggle for the soul of the movement has left many of its original activists facing agonizing decisions: Do they, should they, still belong?" Washington Post 12/31/10
The Tea Party claims to be pro business and anti big bureaucracy, including big government. It believes that government stifles entrepreneurship and destroys creativity of its citizens. There is too much power centralized in government and thus diminishes the power and freedom of our citizens.
Hello Tea Party Activists,
PLEASE WATCH AND SPREAD OUR GROUP VIDEO
of the
BROOKLYN TEA PARTY PLATFORM
SIGN THE PLEDGE at www.brooklynteaparty.org
It only takes a second.
Let's start a coalition.
Thanks for all,
If you are not a precinct committeeman, you are leaving your party ungoverned! Beleive it or not, most precinct committeeman seat in our country are unoccupied - empty - nobody is going that job or casting that vote for our party leaders. You should fill that empty seat.
As an example of just how much power a precinct committeeman ((PC) has, the PC in one tiny legislative district recently dumped (took out) the state chair for the party in AZ. How? Isn't the state chair for the entire state? Yes, but to qualify to be state chair, a person must be a state delegate. The home district of the state chair decided to give the state chairs delegate seat to someone else. Accordingly, the chair lost his basic qualification to occupy the chair. This guy was also the RNC Treasurer! So if you thinks PC is the bottom of the food chain and has no power, think again.
PROCINCT (as in Proactive Precinct) was started six months prior to the last election to provide precinct walk lists for Tea Party and 9/12 activists who could not get those walk lists from their local party. It was a splendid success providing walk list to activists in 20 sates, helping them reach 16 million voters. That aspect of PROCINCT is still available to you for your upcoming city/county elections or scholl board elections, etc.
But the good folks over at PROCINCT knew that more is required for long-term victory of conservative ideals. That's why they just put up a special resource so you can learn how to become a PC in your state. Using resources similar to here where you can post your opinions and questions (and get answers) and receive documentation on just how the process works in your state. The emphasis is on authoritative information that you can rely upon to be seated on your party central committee and actually govern your local party.
A good example of how PROCINCT is serving the needs of folks trying to join their party central committee comes from the state of New York: PC activists in NY discovered that the local Board of Elections had taken them off the ballot! PROCINCT researchers investigated. In the process of investigating the event, we discovered expert and native help right in NY that has been helping folks get elected to their PC seats for years, and we are connecting PC activists with that agency.
So it's not just about furnishing authoritative information, it's about removing obstacles - even unjust obstacles - wherever we find them.
The goal is to have our party governed by the true conservative grassroots - and PROCINCT connects the people who are trying to do that.
When did we start allowing people to run over us? Did it start when a woman was able to sue McDonalds for spilling her hot coffee on her self or what? People are scared to let someone know when they are wrong. America babies everyone. The truth is sugardaddy is out of money and it's time to use a stiff arm. Nobody wants to say that the 22 year old single mom with four kids shouldn't recieve welfare, but at what point do we have to set boundries? Single teenage moms benefit from over half of all medacaid. It's time to stop being friendly and tell people they are F'd up. Maybe if these people had role models in their life growing up they wouldn't be this way. At some point we have to end the madness, and we can't do that by rewarded stupid people with a check every month. Who cares if gays are upset and want to be treated fairly? They are wrong and sorry but we have more important things to worry about than your feelings. If someone is 50 years old and have been living off the government for years and years (we all know at least one) they need to be cut off. Maybe they are better off dead, they are a burden to society. These political games going on in Washington should be illigal and they should be punished for acting childish. The fact that half of the decisions made are revolved around elections it outrageous. The two party system needs to be abolished for good. George Washington tried to warn us of political parties and we did not listen.
Of course, the theory is that many of us will be drafted upward to state and even RNC service where we can exert real influence and finally have the party we desire.
But in the next few days and weeks, there is an opportunity in many states to bypass that local level and acquire a seat directly on your state party committee.
Many state committees have a bylaw that allows candidates (even in UNsuccessful races) to make one or several appointments to their state party committee. If you worked on one of these campaigns, you are certainly in a position to request one of those appointments.
Those appointments certainly won't go to people who do not ask for them!
I am breaking my own rules and responding to this Neanderthal by "arguing with idiots," if you will. This is the typical leftist rant, class warfare, hillbilly tea partiers, etc.
Politicus USA, in a post on October 20, 2010 by Sarah Jones, in an article titled, "Tea Party Oligarchy: Trust Fund Babies Are Good For Workers":
“And liberty. Oh, sweet liberty of being born to the right parents like the founders intended. A nation built upon a system of oligarchs, don’t you dare tread on my trust fund you dirty ape and just in case, we have Sarah Palin the rude ingrate populist puppet to sell it all to you. Oligarchy first! Oh, land that I love….
“The Tea Party is running candidates who aren’t vetted and don’t know what they’re talking about when they puppet big corporate daddy lines or they’re just cuttin’ the puppets out and running the owners of said corporations. All of these things are being sold to you as populism. If you buy that, I’ve got some lovely land in Florida….Gold? A super hot book I wrote myself about myself?”
I'm trying to decide if you people are ill informed, naive, weak minded, or if you actually believe the drivel you write. When speaking of Republican money, you may not know that two-thirds of Wall Street CEOs are democrats. Let me quote the New York Times' article, "Democrats Retain Edge in Campaign Spending," by Michael Luo and Griff Palmer, Published: October 26, 2010:
“Lost in all of the attention paid to the heavy spending by Republican-oriented independent groups in this year’s midterm elections is that Democratic candidates have generally wielded a significant head-to-head financial advantage over their Republican opponents in individual competitive races.”
The fact is, the party of elitists is the Democratic party, whose leaders consist of the some of the richest politicians in the country, like the late Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry, Jane Harman, Jay Rockefeller, Mark Warner, Jared Polis, Frank Lautenberg, Dianne Feinstein, and Harry Teague. These Dems comprise 8 of the 10 richest senators and congressmen in D.C. Their combined wealth is approaching a billion dollars. Further, the Dems are funded by the largest unions in America. During this campaign cycle, the unions have contributed hundreds of millions of dollars. This, despite the fact the polls released this week, shows that union members preferred not to have their money spent this way.
I love the condescending attitude you leftists display mocking anyone who is not you. In your whitless diatribe you mock Christine O'Donnell and infer that she may not be a rocket scientist. I would much rather have her supposed naiveté, which in my estimation is honest patriotism, rather than the feigned intellectualism in D.C., than the scheming backroom, deal-cutting racketeers, which the dems proved themselves to be in the duplicitous handling of the health care package, which the public didn't want, doctors by better than a 2 to 1 margin decry, and economists say will cost trillions of dollars.
Perhaps some of you in the leftist brain trust can figure out how to pay for this latest
round of Marxist palaver. Don't bother to come back with the “tax the rich” scheme. If you took every asset of all of the top 3% of the richest Americans, most of whom are democrats, you would affect the national debt by less than 1%. And taxing small business owners who declare more than $250K annual income will break the back of an Obama weakened economy and drive the nation to ruin quicker.
But, when you think about it, perhaps that's the real goal of leftists like you any. If you can collapse the economy and drive the system into the ground, you and your progressive ilk can step right in and lead us to a bright and shining new world order.
Personally, I've seen enough of New World Orders in my time. I have seen the result of Mr. Hitler's New World Order … seventy million dead and an entire race targeted for genocide; I’ve seen Mr. Stalin's New World Order … forty three million dead. And the communist revolution in China had its own special New World Order; which enlightened the world …in excess of one hundred million people murdered.
Then there was the progressive heroine, Margaret Sanger; a true bulwark and champion of American liberalism and founder of Planned Parenthood. Only problem is, she was a eugenicist, who believed that blacks should be eliminated because they were "breeding and swarming like rats in the streets." Today while blacks make up only 13% of the population, black children account for one-third of all abortions. While 40 million children have been killed in the womb, over 13 million of them have been black children. If any other nation on earth were to slaughter 13 million black children, we would be screaming genocide and sending in UN troops. Today, we give them government money to carry out this genocidal initiative championed by the left.
Then there is good liberal, Woodrow Wilson, another hero of you folks on the left. Only problem is, Wilson was open about his hatred for America. He too was a eugenicist, who thought blacks inferior. In fact, he re-segregated government workers, government offices, and the military.
Robert Byrd, the conscience of the Democratic Party and a former KKK leader, who on Fox News national broadcast, threw around the "N" word, like it was nothing. This, by the way, was not a baited interview. I saw the interview live and the tossing around of the "White N" and "Black N" phrases were in no way related to the conversation. The passages were a complete non-sequitur. What does that tell us about his hidden thoughts?
Might I suggest you, and the rest of the progressive lemmings, go meet some Tea Party folks before you stereotype them as “an assemblage of doltish hillbillies.” You will find that most are above average in intelligence, above average in education, and from all walks of life: independent business people, plumbers, physicists, educators, students, tradesmen, white collar workers, stay-at-home wives, career women, preachers and politicians. They are the face of America. They are not the bearded Marxists, so representative of you pseudo-intellectual elite, who are, in jolting candor, really the intellectually effete.
History has shown your ideology, while sounding high tone, is in fact tone deaf to life beyond the walls of the self-induced delusion of your bookish ivory towers, which are, in reality, an intellectual ghetto in which you subsist.
Socialism has never, and will never, worked. It is a moribund philosophy, with a built in death mechanism. Any political philosophy, which has as the basis of success taking by force, or force of law from one to reward the ineptitude or sloth of another, is doomed to fail. Driving the lazy, inept, or duplicitous to the trough, while telling them they deserve a place at that trough, is courting both moral and financial exhaustion. At some point there will be so many people at the trough that there is no one left to fill the trough. At some point you run out of other people's money. When the goal of socialism is finally achieved, and the stated goal of economic equality is achieved, history shows us that the equality created is intellectual, moral, and economic bankruptcy.
Please do us all a favor. Before you destroy our medical system, talk to the Brits, who are walking away from socialized medicine. They realize it is a complete failure. Study Romney care: it is bankrupting the state of Massachusetts. Before government decided to step in and treat us like we were helpless idiots, who couldn't survive without them, each of us, and all of us, took care of our own families, took care of our elderly, took care of the poor among us, and shunned the professional dead beats. Because we were personally involved, we knew that the neighbor down the road was a hard worker, who was just having a hard time, and we, as individuals, lent a helping hand.
Conversely, the guy living across the street, well, he was a drunk and lazy. He chose to pursue happiness in his way ... the bottle and sloth. He is free to pursue that happiness. And when he fails, and his relatives have to adopt his children, take care of his wife, and he is alone in his whiskey clouded world, he will have accomplished his pursuit. Perhaps then, and only then, can he make a choice to pursue happiness in another way.
In other words, those of us in the Tea Party are not a bunch of toothless, ignorant rubes, needing your beneficent guidance to make it through the day. We are not asking you to provide for us, think for us, help us, and certainly, don't try to control us, tax us, or attempt to live our lives for us. What we really need from all of you good, caring liberals on the left, is to be "left" alone.
But, because we understand that you are still concerned about the poor and the downtrodden, I have come up with what might be the perfect plan. About 15% of the population is living below the poverty line. By the way, this is the same number of poor we had at the start of the great society programs under Lyndon Johnson.
There are about 20% of Americans who admit to being liberals. For you guilt-ridden leftists, we need to create a special form, from the government, which will provide this service for all of you. On the form you will swear that you are a good liberal, concerned about the poor and downtrodden, and that you believe that these people should be taken care of by their fellow Americans. On the form you will have the opportunity to either have enough money taken from your paycheck every payday to support a poor person, or, if you prefer, government workers can actually deliver to your house a poor person. From that point on, you will be responsible for their care, feeding, hygiene, behavior, and outcome.
This takes all the cold bureaucratic treatment out of the equation and provides a one-on-one loving contact with your very own poor person, drunk, drug addict, or societal malcontent. It's akin to having a living Chia pet. Water them with your personal care, love, and concern, and watch them grow.
Similar programs could be conducted for illegal aliens. Just like the girl scouts, who ask, “How many boxes of cookies do you want this year?” the government can ask, “How many illegals will you take this year, Mr. Liberal? As you know, we now have 20 million of them, and only you can help us reach our goal of placing every one of them in their very own home!”
We can give this program high sounding name like, “The Human Chia-nome Project,” and each of you can save humanity … one person at a time.
Meanwhile, the rest of us, thanks to your personal involvement, can go to Washington D.C. and state capitals, and get rid of all of those failed social programs, dollar wasting boondoggles, and worthless, feel good government incursions, that are indebting our children to the third and fourth generations.
Isn't it amazing how much we can accomplish when we really sit down and communicate? Just look how angry my response to your intellectual flotsam was at the beginning of this response, and how conciliatory it is now. I really feel like we've connected on a spiritual level ... like we've brought light to your darkness.
I know I speak for all us when I say, “Thank you.”
Thank you from the bottom of our hearts that you are willing to put your empty-headed utopian dreams into practice. And just in case all of this doesn't go just exactly as planned, we'll just go ahead and build that wall down there on the border, make plans with Mexico to help their economy, so that they can support their own people, and tend to the unseating of the dogs inhabiting the seats of power in D.C., the governor's chairs in all of the states, and the leftist incompetents in counties and towns across America. Maybe we should do what we can to begin once again teaching our history, demanding constitutional government, working and contributing to campaigns that remove the corrupt and vulgar, thereby effectuating their replacement with the honorable and forthright.
Black & Bulletproof: An African-American Warrior in the Israeli Armytells the intriguing story of one man’s journey from the terrors of“thug life” to a position of honor in the Israeli military.
Standing at a checkpoint in Israel with his assault rifle pointed over the headsof Palestinian Arabs, Marcus Hardie reminds himself, I am the good guy.Hardie was born and raised by his grandmother in a poor neighborhood onthe outskirts of Los Angeles, a black youth stuck in the urbanghetto. He survived the ghetto and graduated from college and lawschool, Marcus Hardie seemed destined for a future far from the violentsurroundings of his childhood, an upbringing filled with urban gangwarfare. He showed promise in California’s political scene, rising toan important position in the Governor’s office. No one would haveimagined, though, that he would soon become an elite anti-terroroperative in one of the most violent places in the world: The MiddleEast.
Marcus Hardie was groomed for a position of power in the Republican Party. This memoir deeply explores the inner working of a political party. This is the book you want to read this political season.
Stepping Up To Preserve Freedoms! A new novel, "Matapalo," (written by just an average guy) illustrates just what the Tea Party Movement is all about. Fictional average people, in a fictional average medium-sized city, come to grips with an over-reaching Government, and slowly realize how guarantees strangely reduce freedoms. Who and why one individual steps up is a surprise. Available at Amazon.com.
Daniel Lechner
Wickham’s latestmasterpiece appeared today in USA Today (Aug. 31, 2010, p. 11A) and was,naturally, titled, “Jackson, Sharpton Rallies Carry More Influence ThanBeck’s.”
Which is why, I suppose, the media has spent so muchtime attacking Beck’s rally.
Anyhoo, the gist of Wickham’s littleessay is that suddenly old players like Jackson and Sharpton have theability to “spur” the “core constituency” of the Democratic Party,blacks, to get up off the couch and stop watching SportCenter (to borrowa phrase from obama) and head to the polls in November to rescue theDemocratic Party.
I use the term ‘black’ due to a Radio One pollin October 2008 that found 42% of those polled prefer to be called‘black’ rather than African American (www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/28/liggins.vote/index.html).
I’mall for giving this ultra-minority a voice.
While Wickham saysthe Jackson/Sharpton rallies will create Hope and Change V2.0, hepredicts that the Tea Party “will be short-lived.”
Where wereJackson, Sharpton, and their “core constituents” a month after obama’selection when Democrats were losing two seats in black districts inLouisiana – including New Orleans? Wickham’s charges were missing inGeorgia during a December 2008 Senate run-off election which was run by aRepublican by 15%. Why were Jackson, Sharpton, and Wickham notspurring their “core” to vote in 2009 during governor’s races inVirginia and New Jersey where surveys were showing drops in black voterturnout upwards to 40% as compared with the general election in 2008? (http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/62967-democrats-ponder-a-big-drop-in-turnout-among-black-voters).
Wickhamis placing much faith in an unreliable voting block and two uninspiringmen with racial chips on their shoulders.
The Tea Party, Wickhamsays, is a “21st century incarnation of the anti-immigrationKnow-Nothing Movement of the 1850s.” Thus the crux of his death knell.
HereWickham, like so many, confuse the extreme nativist ideology of theKnow-Nothings with the reasonable, conservative anti-illegal immigrationbelief of the Tea Partiers.
The difference on this point is aswide as a Reagan victory over Jimmy Carter.
Due to the majoritytwo-party hold on our politics, and given the fact that members of bothmajor parties and states like Michigan are fighting to keep a formal TeaParty party off election ballots, we most likely will not be able tocompare electoral successes between the two movements.
TheKnow-Nothings, prior to imploding due to their extremism, did have someelectoral success.
Formally known as the American Party, theKnow-Nothings actually won 62 seats in the U.S. House of Representativesduring the 1854 midterm elections.
They made their way onto the1856 Presidential ballot with candidate Millard Fillmore, who receivednearly 1 million votes.
This, and more, from a party thatbasically morphed its way into being seen as a joke.
However, TeaParty support has led to more elective offices for their supportedcandidates than has the support of obama for his chosen candidates.
Wickhamwastes his time comparing a formal political party built on an extremeanti-immigration ideology with a group aligned to support candidatesthat support various conservative issues.
Wickham and Sharptonare filled with vigor when liberal groups march and coalesce for acandidate and a cause, but are threatened and become hypocritical whenconservatives choose a similar path to make their voices heard.
I’mjust surprised Wickham didn’t bring up Sarah Palin.
"The Declaration of Independence" states that when your Government is no longer in the best interest of it's people, it is the right of the people to abolish them and re institute a new one. That means stop talking and do something, it means be Patriots you morons.
Your Government is coming! Your Government is coming! I don't have to be on a horse to know that.
hoosierboy43@yahoo.com You want to be real Patriots and honor and fight for your rights, give me a shout, otherwise, let me know how deeper the shit your in is getting and remember, just talk, no action, just talk.
Action is real results, talk is just that, Talk! I forgot, who is listening to you! no one right now, get a clue about what is real and what is just crap. Donald Duck is on face book, want to join or maybe you can help Mini with farm-ville...lol people really are out of touch.
Author: Brian D. Hill
Source: USWGO Alternative News; Sources are listed below the article
Date: August 16, 2010
Damon Dunn is a Republican being put in the position to be nominated for the Secretary of State of California is actually a registeredDemocrat in border-bottom: medium none;"">Florida since 1999 according to Dr.Orly Taitz. The speech by Dr. Taitz about the Election Fraud was foundon YouTube by theuser William Wagener.
Dr. Taitz is also running to be nominated for Secretary of State so Damon Dunn who is competing in the nominations for California Secretaryof State is who she is up against in the elections.
According to Dr. Taitz Mr. Dunn has violated three Elections codes of California. Those California Elections codes are §8001(a)(2),§18203,and §18500which has been searched up on the California Governmentcode search engine.
For those who don't know what three Elections Codes were violated I will explain all three.
According to §8001(a)(2)
No declaration of candidacy for a partisan office or for
membership on a county central committee shall be filed, by a
candidate unless
(2) the candidate has not been registered as
affiliated with a qualified political party other than that political
party the nomination of which he seeks within 12 months, or, in the
case of an election governed by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
10700) of Part 6 of Division 10, within three months immediately
prior to the filing of the declaration.
So somebody that is already affiliated with a qualified political party has to state their change to another political party 12 monthsprior to running for office.
According to §18203
Any person who files or submits for filing a nomination
paper or declaration of candidacy knowing that it or any part of it
has been made falsely is punishable by a fine not exceeding one
thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment in the state prison for
16 months or two or three years or by both the fine and imprisonment.
So in simple terms for this one if anybody who files for, makes a declaration for, or submits a filing for Nomination or Candidacy knowingthat the information put on the filing was false information then thatis considered fraud according to California Election Code (CEC). So inother words if I filed that I am not affiliated with any political partyeven though I was years ago then I am lying about my politicalaffiliations to a Government registration facility which is what fraudis. So if I told the FBI my name was Sally Joe then I am committingfraud in a Government office. So you get the picture of what fraud is.
So the last Code is §18500 and so according to it
Any person who commits fraud or attempts to commit fraud,
and any person who aids or abets fraud or attempts to aid or abet
fraud, in connection with any vote cast, to be cast, or attempted to
be cast, is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for 16
months or two or three years.
So according to this law if somebody aids, commits, approves, encourages, or supports Fraud then they are held liable and is guilty ofa Felony.
So now I explained what all three California Elections Codes Damon Dunn has violated according to Dr. Taitz.
Dr. Taitz claims she wants to become the California Secretary of State to expose all the inner political corruptions within California.Dr. Taitz has also been fighting in court for months to years overObamas Birth Certificate issue over the fact that Mr. Obama did notrelease a valid long form Birth Certificate before his inauguration toPresidential office.
Also according to William Wagener's video description it says
Across America, TEA PARTY fakes are endorsing and Pushing RINO's to win
the Republican Primaries. RINO = Republican In Name Only. Damon DUNNis the man who had forged Signatures on his Nomination Papers, in theCalifornia
Secretary of STATE GOP primary. See Proof, in "Nomination FRAUD" onY.T.
Mr. DUNN had been a registered Democrat all his life, publically statedObama is His "Hero", in a Stanford Blog interview, and voted only in2009 one time. ONE TIME. Yet, he makes wonderful speeches and wantsus to believe he is qualified to run the States Elections, having votedONE TIME, prior to the June 2010 Republican Primary.
So according to William Wagener there are democrats who have became Republicans just to get elected even though that is a false Declarationof affiliation for a political party. It is nomination Fraud whensomebody does not declare that they begin to affiliate themselves with adifferent political party because of the corruption and infiltrationthat breeds from the sudden change in political parties. So that is whystates have passed law codes that anybody who changes a political partyhas to wait a certain time period plus has to declare that the person isready to change to another political party.
Even though the Standford Interview is mentioned by William Wagener I am unable to source it at this time until somebody notifies me of thesource of the Interview.
Damon Dunn got a scholarship into Stanford University then got into Football. Dr. Dunn also played in the NFL for the Jacksonville Jaguars,Cleveland Browns, New York Jets and Dallas Cowboys.
Damon Dunn has also been affiliated with the Democrat party according to Dr. Taitz.
Damon Dunn also thought of Obama as his hero according to a Stanford Blog Interview.
The video regarding the Orly Taitz speech is below:
[stream flv=http://uswgo.com/rapidleech/r322/files/2010_-_Another_RIGGED_ELECTION-%5BfxMQRK2TbZc%5D%5Bf34%5D.flvimg=http://uswgo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/OrlyTaitzSpeech.jpgembed=true share=true width=640 height=480 dock=true controlbar=bottombandwidth=high autostart=false /]
Sources (Links are within the article but sources are also included here for reference):
CommonElections Fraud Violations - Also mirrored here
YouTube - 2010 - Another RIGGED ELECTION - Video mirrored here
California Government codes search engine
CaliforniaElections Code §8001(a)(2)
CaliforniaElections Code §18203
CaliforniaElections Code §18500
Links that were referenced in this article:
“Say, Betcha Didn’t Know . . . .”
the Story Behind a NY Times “Retraction”
After her excellent comparison of the courage exhibited by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer compared to our wimpy President’s non-efforts to protect the nation’s borders, perhaps Sarah Palin ought to be making statements about the New York Times publishers, editors, reporters, columnists, op-ed writers, bloggers (and everybody but the janitors) all combined . . . lacking the “cajones” of a one-celled protozoan . . . Let’s talk about one “retraction” in the Times . . . .
Some months ago, the liberal media was alive with a story about TEA Party members yelling the N-word fifteen times (or twenty-nine times in one paper) at Black members of congress as they walked up the capitol steps on that sunny day in March when Obamacare was passed. This was considered BIG . . . front-page news cussed and discussed in every liberal broadcast for weeks to come. Only one problem, it never happened. The $100,000 reward offered to anyone who can show “verifiable video footage,” showing one instance (not fifteen or twenty-nine) of the n-word being used has been offered lo, these several months and no one has offered documentary evidence, much less collected the reward. Similarly, no video footage of any Black congressman or any congress member being spat upon on that day has ever emerged.
Just the other day, (and this is August 5th) almost five months after it purportedly happened, the New York Times finally (having researched the story carefully – hah!) ran a retraction/correction . . . well, sort of . . . .
What they did actually was not even deign to draw attention to the retraction/correction by putting it off as a separate item at all. Instead they boldly went where few retractions/corrections have gone: they placed it inconspicuously at the bottom of another story. To wit:
“The Political Times column last Sunday, about a generational divide over racial attitudes, erroneously linked one example of a racially charged statement to the Tea Party movement. While Tea Party supporters have been connected to a number of such statements, there is no evidence that epithets reportedly directed in March at Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, outside the Capitol, came from Tea Party members.”
“All the News that’s Fit to Print?” Really???? Perhaps the Times ought to change their motto to “All the Gutless Lies Obama Would Prefer We Print.” First of all, that, whatever else it is, is neither a correction nor a retraction. There is NO “we got it wrong and we apologize” aspect to that piece of garbage by the piece of garbage Times.
1. Notice that the actual event is left muddy, there’s no mention of the n-word or Mr. Lewis’ race . . . nothing that could make the “apology” meaningful.
2. Notice that the retraction/correction was certainly NOT page-one news like the original story was . . . .
3. Notice the retraction/correction refers to “one example” . . . when the Times -- by March, 2010 – had already been printing such accusations about the TEA Party and conservatives virtually non-stop without basis for over a year . . . and meanwhile has continued to spout out this nonsense ceaselessly since March, 2010.
4. The retraction/correction is over four months late and it’s not actually either a retraction or a correction and it does not apologize . . . it just says, “There is no evidence . . . epithets . . . came from TEA Party members” which is, at best a half-truth since . . .
5. The retraction/correction does NOT say “There is NO EVIDENCE any epithets with n-words were hurled by anyone at all.
6. The retraction/correction says “While Tea Party supporters have been connected to a number of such statements,” but doesn’t say for every two thousand such accusations (not connections, but “accusations”) perhaps one** is true.
7. The retraction/correction talks about “a generational divide over racial attitudes” . . . that, my friends, is what has been known as a “weasel phrase” or possibly “a (or an) euphemism” . . . but which is actually just an old-fashioned LIE, not a half-truth, a LIE. It’s acting like . . . a) some sort of generation-gap exists and b) the TEA party (with older members?) treats differences in race one way that’s presumably at least a bit racist and c) the Times and its readers knows better because they are elite, intelligent, etc. but . . . RACISM, you Times morons, is RACISM, and lies are lies, and p_ss-poor journalism is pi__-poor journalism.
8. The Times seems to have never gone to the “horse’s mouth” for final verification of the event’s truth or falsity. Since Representative Lewis, a Black Democrat, is reportedly one of the few congressmen of either party, any race, any gender, any age who has been repeatedly and fairly called “honorable.” Yet Mr. Lewis has repeatedly refused to corroborate the stories about being spat upon or having the N-word hurled at him. Perhaps the Times should have asked Mr. Lewis, if his silence itself on this matter was “honorable” (since the only probable reason for this silence was to NOT gainsay his fellow Democrats)?
9. The Times has continuously run as straight-news, each and every liberal’s or left-wing Democrat’s accusation of RACISM as undeniable fact for at least the last ten years IF DIRECTED at CONSERVATIVES . . . but which has never attributed the barely 4% of Black votes going to Mc Cain while Obama received more and a larger percentage of White votes (almost 48%) than Kerry or Gore as having any racial significance at all. Isn’t it strange that the Times, which regards itself as so urbane and sophisticated in oh, so many ways, is so gullible that after ten years it has never figured out that the unending refuge for progressive (wanting to “progress” beyond the outdated and faulty Constitution) scoundrels is labelling all their opposition as “RACISTS.” How sophisticated is that? Just so the Times understands Rajjpuut clearly, he is saying the Times is guilty of not only abetting reverse-racism, but also of continuously and consistently falsely charging and abetting false charges of racism by others against Conservatives and conservative groups.
10. a) The Times recently OMITTED publishing news about a speech being applauded by the NAACP wherein a Black preacher and a couple of thugs who helped him beat up a Black entrepreneur (the man made a fortune in 2008 selling Obama buttons, but tried to sell “The audacity of dope” buttons featuring the president with a joint between his lips) were defended and lauded. The speaker repeatedly praised the preacher and the other thugs and called the entrepreneur repeatedly “an Uncle Tom.” b) the Times has also NOT investigated the story about the Black Panther voter intimidation suit being dropped nor c) the story about Obama appointee Deputy Attorney General Julie Fernandez ordering a roomful of Department of Justice employees to “forget about investigating voter intimidation and racism cases where the victims are White and the perpetrators are Black and d) nor have they run the story about Ms. Fernandez ordering DOJ employees to forget about “investigating violations of the Motor Voter Act” that is, e) like Ms. Fernandez, the New York Times is acting like racism is just something that Whites do to minorities, it can never happen the other way around.
The Times which, (in keeping with the “all-non-progressive’s are racists theme”) has ceaselessly slandered FOX News . . . but, in fact, the Times isn’t worthy of one-ten-thousandth the esteem which FOX’s real journalists earn every minute of every day. Cowardly, cowardly, cowardly, cowardly, cowardly New York Times. Until such time as the same New York Times effort that’s gone into propagating these lies is shown for dispelling them and pointing out those who so blithely and continuously speak them, until that day . . . cowardly, cowardly New York Times.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
**Rajjpuut who has attended three TEA Party events and never seen one instance of hate or racism does know of two instances worth mentioning since March, 2009 (a year before the Obamacare passage) . . . .
#1 In a specious incident, a fellow was shown on FOX News carrying a sign partially clouded over by their editorial staff that presumably said something like, "F_ck the N_ggers." In that 20 second-incident he was quickly confronted by about five male TEA Party members, an argument ensued, his sign was torn from his hands trampled upon, and he was physically escorted from their midst. FOX also showed coverage of three other networks' newcasts which just showed the man holding his sign with the word “nigg_rs” clearly visible in a still photograph.
#2 Within a supposed TEA Party splinter faction, (Rajjpuut has seen evidence that makes him believe it was used by Harry Reid in Nevada to choose his least capable opponent, Sharon Angle, to win the Republican nomination -- but who knows it could be a valid organization pursuing TEA Party goals) known as the TEA Party Express , there was an upper echelon official who is supposedly "a shock jock" who on his personal blogsite spouted hate attacks on Barack Obama and referred to Islam as having "a monkey god." After, what Rajjpuut believes was an inordinate length of time the shock-jock was forced to resign. In any case the TEA Party express has zero credibility with any of the TEA Party membership outside themselves.
#1 In a specious incident, a fellow was shown on FOX News carrying a sign partially clouded over by their editorial staff that presumably said something like, "F_ck the N_ggers." In that 20 second-incident he was quickly confronted by about five male TEA Party members, an argument ensued, his sign was torn from his hands trampled upon, and he was physically escorted from their midst. FOX also showed coverage of three other networks' newcasts which just showed the man holding his sign with the word “nigg_rs” clearly visible in a still photograph.
#2 Within a supposed TEA Party splinter faction, (Rajjpuut has seen evidence that makes him believe it was used by Harry Reid in Nevada to choose his least capable opponent, Sharon Angle, to win the Republican nomination -- but who knows it could be a valid organization pursuing TEA Party goals) known as the TEA Party Express , there was an upper echelon official who is supposedly "a shock jock" who on his personal blogsite spouted hate attacks on Barack Obama and referred to Islam as having "a monkey god." After, what Rajjpuut believes was an inordinate length of time the shock-jock was forced to resign. In any case the TEA Party express has zero credibility with any of the TEA Party membership outside themselves.
