by Justitia Themis 32 Replies latest jw friends
Im getting pretty tired of extreme points of view from both sides of the fence. Yes, there are problems, yes we need to take responsibility and fix this - but rhetoric and extreme points of view only muddy the waters and make it more difficult to pick out the right bits from all the bad.
Congratulations on filling the air with more fog!
Hah! If that were true wouldn't the Coffee Party be more successful? And wouldn't you have a factual link?
Here is the Coffee Party's contribution page, Bizzybee:
https://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6500/p/salsa/donation/common/public/?donate_page_KEY=1853
democracyinaction.org is funded by OSI, which is Soros organization.
http://www2.democracyinaction.org/about
DemocracyInAction is funded by a mixture of service fees from the organizations using our tools, private grants, and individual donations. You can become a DemocracyInAction donor here.
Many thanks to our foundation grantors, the Surdna Foundation and the Open Society Institute, for their support.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0J2B_BMgD_U
So now you know Soros ties to Coffee Party. You can't waffle and demand links.
Now since you demonized Koch's possible involvement with the Tea Party, wHat are your thoughts on Soros and the Coffee Party?
Coffee Party founder Annabell Park worked for the Obama campaign, which is wrecking the country:
The New York Times and Washington Post are promoting a group called the "Coffee Party" organized by filmmaker Annabel Park.
The Coffee Party is a political parasite which presents itself as something it is not. As reported in the NY Times [see update below], Park presents herself as not hostile to the Tea Party movement, and in fact, hopes to bring some Tea Partiers into her group:“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.” ....
Ms. Park and chapter organizers said they would invite Tea Party members to join their Coffee counterparts in discussions. “We need to roll up our sleeves, put our heads together and work it out,” she said. “That’s, to me, an American way of doing this.”
In fact, a simple internet search (which the NY Times apparently is not capable of doing) reveals that Park organized the Coffee Party for the specific purpose of undermining the Tea Party movement.
Park is a former Strategy Analyst [Park's Linked In page has been taken down, here is a cached link] at the NY Times who was one of organizers and operators of the United for Obama video channel at YouTube:
A Korean-American filmmaker is in charge of creating video clips that are playing a role in increasing support for Senator Barack Obama, the frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.
"I found that people have little understanding of the change that Senator Barack Obama is advocating. I thought from my experience in using videos for civil movements that videos would be the best way to promote the need for change and for Obama. That's why I decided to work for the Obama campaign," Annabel Park said.
Joining the contest in December last year as chief of a promotional video team, Park has produced some 20 five-minute video clips which have generated a positive response. A clip interviewing actress Kelly Hu in support of the senator was viewed some 10,000 times, and a music video called "Oh Bama " [embed below, Park appears at 1:35]] drew wide attention. She has also produced Spanish-language videos to draw support from Hispanics.
The 40-year-old Park is leading an Obama promotional section on video-sharing site YouTube (www.youtube.com/unitedforobama) with around 10 other volunteers.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo4QoNfaBoU
Park's Twitter history leaves no doubt as to her hatred of the Tea Party movement, and the formation of the Coffee Party as a counterweight:
It is very clear from Park's background, and her own Tweets, that the Coffee Party simply is part of the perpetual Obama campaign, a means by which to subvert the real grassroots Tea Party movement by co-opting part of the message, but in a way which supports keeping Obama in power.
Much like a parasite which feeds off of and ultimately takes over the host.http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/03/coffee-party-parasite.html
So she is not a centrist. Coffee Party is not moderate grassroots. It is a liberal Obama/Soros front group posing in order to dupe people.
Partisan extremists.
Good thing it has been an utter FAIL!
NB, your links didn't lead to anything about Soros.
However, we do know the financial advantages to Koch Industries of political clout (deregulation of their operations, Citizens United, etc.)
What financial advantage would Soros realize from donating (a maximum of $5,000) to the Coffee Party?
Off to the gym.
Why do Americans feel the need to associate perfectly acceptable beverages with politics? Is nothing sacred anymore?
*smile*
NB, your links didn't lead to anything about Soros.
Nice waffling BizzyBee.
Soros admits he benefits from his involvment.
The link I posted shows OSI. OSI is Soros.
Here is the OSI website,
DUH!
What financial advantage would Soros realize from donating (a maximum of $5,000) to the Coffee Party?
On the self interest canard, from my link from before on the "man who broke the bank of England"
It was more than passing strange for Mayer to use the “self-interest” canard. In “Covert Operations” Mayer trotted out a spokesman for George Soros, the liberal billionaire and political activist, who “argued that Soros’s giving is transparent, and that ‘none of his contributions are in the service of his own economic interests.’ ” Six years earlier, however, in a profile of Soros for the New Yorker, Mayer had written differently. The hedge fund king told her how he’d once established a think tank in England “which had at first looked like a fruitless venture”—right up to the minute his connections opened a door into the British bond market. “I made many millions,” Soros told Mayer. (The pound sterling wasn’t as lucky.)
DUH!
IN PRACTICE, they are racist, homophobic, anti-environmentalist and promote a religious (evangelical Christian) agenda to tear down the separation of church and state.
BizzyBee:
Please elaborate on the separation of church and state. The fact is there is no Constitutional separation of Church and State. The constitution says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The only thing I believe you think you know about the constitution is what you've heard other left wingers spout. I would doubt that you have read it yourself. If you have, please show me where there is a separation of church and state IN THE CONSTITUTION. I await your response eagerly.
Are you suggesting that evangelical christians have no constitutional right to express their choices by voting or by organizing and being active politically? Are you suggesting that because the Koch brothers are billionaires, they have no right to express their political ideology and support the candidates they choose?
Are you suggesting that evangelical christians have no constitutional right to express their choices by voting or by organizing and being active politically? Are you suggesting that because the Koch brothers are billionaires, they have no right to express their political ideology and support the candidates they choose?
Good points drewcoul.
The other thing is that the Kochs are not social conservatives. They have no interest in letting religion run the government. For example they founded the Cato Institute which takes liberal positions on social issues. They might even be atheist/agnostics.
http://reason.com/blog/2011/02/24/evil-koch-bros-support
They are Libertarians. One of them even ran against Reagan as Libertarian Party nominee. You people spout the blather you are fed without even understanding what you are attacking. Perfect clone troopers.
Im getting pretty tired of extreme points of view from both sides of the fence. Yes, there are problems, yes we need to take responsibility and fix this - but rhetoric and extreme points of view only muddy the waters and make it more difficult to pick out the right bits from all the bad.
Concur wholeheartedly. We've reached the point where the Republicans could propose universal single payer health care the and Democrats would find something wrong with it. There seems to be a wing of the Republican party that is suddenly against foreign intervention and spreading democracy because it was Obama that started the "kinetic military action." To her credit, even Cindy Sheehan can't get onboard that bus.
And everybody is for "bipartisan action" by which they mean the other side should just roll over and accept whatever is being proposed.
I'm sick of it.
BTT
