SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
November 20, 2009· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

Tea Party gets its own documentary

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

Back in April I attended the SCV’s own Tea Party and was surprised by the big and angry turnout. It’s probably one of the larger protests I’ve seen while living in the SCV. I posted a video which you can view here.

Seven months later and the Tea Party movement shows no signs of slowing down. Indeed, they have their own film coming out next week just in time for the holidays.

No doubt all the SCV Tea Party People will be happy to see all the anger and anti-government hysteria documented on screen. Sounds like it’s got a good scary music score to boot!

By the way, did you know we now have two Tea Party blogs in the SCV? www.teapartyscv.com, or, for dyslexics, there’s also www.scvteaparty.com.

If you’re a conservative reading SCVTalk, it’s got to be good to know you have options. Plenty of SCV blogs to go around!

Comments (22)

  1. cashNovember 20, 2009 at 12:58 pm
    “government hysteria” Come on Jeff. Are opposing views an indication of hysteria in your book.
  2. SCVFanNovember 20, 2009 at 2:29 pm
    Anger, anti-Government hysteria, and TEA Parties are pretty foundational for our Country. It’s kinda of how we started.
  3. GangFangNovember 20, 2009 at 3:27 pm
    Best horror movie of the season, I can’t wait!
  4. GromitNovember 21, 2009 at 2:01 am
    Jeff, I was at the SCV Tea Party on the very day you speak of. You keep using the word anger. The only angry person that was there was that one woman, and for all we know she could have even been a plant from the HufPo folks. The protesters were smiling and having a great time expressing their concerns. I know I stayed the entire time. You also did not mention that these so called angry protesters gave tons of food to the local food bank during this protest. I saw no anger. I did see deep concern, and if you’ll be honest many of the issues they were worried about have come to pass. Stimulus has done almost nothing. And you have to admit they were right.
  5. spineflower2November 21, 2009 at 11:11 am
    With SCV gaining on the SFV for porn oproduction, maybe a Teabagging Documentary will be next.
  6. MoneyNovember 21, 2009 at 4:12 pm
    To all Teabaggers: “The historical record clearly shows the economy overall and the stock market in particular almost always do better under Democratic presidents. Just days after the Washington Post documented that George W. Bush presided over the worst eight-year economic performance in the modern American presidency, the New York Times in January featured an analysis comparing presidential performance going back to Eisenhower. As the Times showed, George W. Bush, the first MBA president, was a historic failure when it came to expanding GDP, producing jobs and fueling stock market growth. And across almost every indicator (article here, charts here), Democrats outperformed their Republican counterparts. The superior performance of Democratic presidents covers virtually the entire spectrum of economic indicators. As Elliott Parker of the University of Nevada, Reno detailed in a 2006 paper, since 1949 Democratic administrations have done better than Republican ones when it comes to unemployment (5.2% to 6.0%), job creation (-.0.4% decrease in unemployment, compared to 0.3% increase), GDP growth rate (4.2% to 2.9%), and even corporate profits as a share of GDP. And to be sure, he found the Dow benefits from Democrats in the White House. There’s no shortage of studies to show that stock market returns are higher under Democratic leadership. (As it turns out, Wall Street’s performance is also better when Democrats control Congress.) In 2000, Pedro Santa-Clara and Rossen Valkanov of UCLA’s Anderson School of Business concluded that “that the average excess return in the stock market is higher under Democratic than Republican presidents – a difference of 9 percent per year for the value-weighted portfolio and 16 percent for the equal-weighted portfolio.” As the New York Times noted of UCLA study in 2003: “It’s not even close. The stock market does far better under Democrats… The Tea Baggers would do well to remember one final truth. The words of Harry Truman, the man Sarah Palin cited as her model, are as true today as when he uttered them generations ago: ‘If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.’ “
  7. cashNovember 22, 2009 at 11:40 am
    Well Money, Apparently your new ruler is going to rewrite history, he is clearly headed in that direction. You need to read a bit more about Harry Truman. Truman was an honest and humble man of simple means, Obama is a ego maniac that is less than truthful.
  8. MoneyNovember 22, 2009 at 9:16 pm
    That’s your comeback, cash? What’s the matter? Unable to google your leader, pill-poppin’ Rush fast enough to quote some more of his b.s.?
  9. Bill ReynoldsNovember 23, 2009 at 12:01 am
    How is the job market doing these days, Mr. Money Man?
  10. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 9:40 am
    Like I’ve said before, it’s gonna take awhile to fix 8 years of Bush’s mistakes.
  11. navigatorNovember 23, 2009 at 11:25 am
    It’s going to take even longer to fix 8 months of Obama’s mistakes.
  12. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 12:09 pm
    The “logic” of you old conservative men baffles me.
  13. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 1:28 pm
    Inheriting a federal budget in the black and CBO forecast for a $5.6 trillion surplus over 10 years, President George W. Bush quickly set about dismantling the progress made under Bill Clinton. Bush’s $1.4 trillion tax cut in 2001, followed by a $550 billion second round in 2003, accounted for the bulk of the yawning budget deficits he produced. Like Reagan and Stockman before him, Bush resorted to the rosy scenario to claim he would halve the budget deficit by 2009. Before the financial system meltdown last fall, Bush’s deficit already reached $490 billion. (And even before the passage of the Wall Street bailout, Bush had presided over a $4 trillion increase in the national debt, a staggering 71% jump.) By this January, the mind-numbing deficit figure reached $1.2 trillion, forcing President Bush to raise the debt ceiling to $11.3 trillion.
  14. Bill ReynoldsNovember 23, 2009 at 2:18 pm
    If you inherit a deficit, why drive it dramatically higher? If you’re personally in debt, will you spend hand over fist out of it? I don’t think so…
  15. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 3:14 pm
    If you inherit a surplus, why turn it into a deficit?
  16. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 3:15 pm
    go back to sleep billy
  17. Bill ReynoldsNovember 23, 2009 at 5:50 pm
    Yo, Money Man… two deficits make it right, eh? Wake up and smell the coffee! If you were brave you would post your real name.
  18. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 9:36 pm
    you a tough guy, billy?
  19. MoneyNovember 23, 2009 at 9:37 pm
    why don’t you tell your teabagging girlfriend, cash, to use her real name?
  20. Bill ReynoldsNovember 23, 2009 at 9:54 pm
    Tough enough to use my real name.
  21. GangFangNovember 24, 2009 at 12:41 am
    Is this serious? So what if you use your real name? You are still ON THE INTERNET. Big difference from talking face to face. Dorks!
  22. MoneyNovember 24, 2009 at 9:40 pm
    dorks..nah. But using a vampire phrase as your screen name, now that’s dorky.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support