Should the Tea Party be rebranded as a terrorist group?

Relevant Articles:

Tea Partiers assualt a fellow atheist

Tea Partiers want the uninsured to be left to die

Tea Partiers want to dismantle Washington


By now, you all know about the Tea Party, and what they stand for.  In the Hang with Friends group, I expressed my outrage that CNN held a Republican Presidential debate just for them and I even called political terrorists.  I stand by my assumption, but I want to hear from you.  Do you think the Tea Party should be rebranded as a terrorist organization?  Was Vice President Joe Biden correct when he called Tea Partiers "terrorists"?

Well, what else can you say about an organization that sends death threats to government officials, and hold down innocent citizens and stomp on their heads?  Again, this is just my opinion, but I want to hear from you.


UPDATE:  OK, I like that you're all giving me your opinions, but has anyone actually read the articles I posted?


UPDATE:  I'm overwhelmed by the responses that've been posted here.  I think we can all agree that the Tea Party isn't what we would call a terrorist group, but they're dangerously close to becoming one.  What you should all ask yourselves is: is there anything we can do to stop it?  What is it?  And should we do anythng at all?  I think we should.  We're fighting at least one terrorist organization overseas, the last thing we need is to fight another one here in America.

Views: 568

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I agree the tea baggers are a very un-American bunch. No compromise is considered a good thing?  But CNN has really gone tabloid so I'm not surprised. I've quit them so many times over Lou Dobbs, Glen Beck, Nancy Grace, you name it.  Tabloid trash. Sad that they used to be central and now they lean toward and compete with Fox. 

To me this is self-destructive and antisocial, but doesn't rise to the level of terrorist.
Yeah, Ruth is right here.  I agree.

Well, here in South Carolina, I have heard from the self identified Tea Party types "By ballot or bullets we'll be in power come 2012".

When I've pointed out the language they are using is pretty much the same as the groups they call "terrorist/communist/Nazi" when translated, they balk to discuss anything further with me.

That is enough to say that they are close to the killing and bombing but are only waiting to see.  By then it maybe too late for some.

Have you ever tried to tell law enforcement about what they said?  Because if they said that exact statement, it's enough to constitute a legitimate threat.
I think many in government, particularly military, police, state troopers and sheriffs' departments, would brush this off, if for no other reason than that many around them are also tea partiers.  I've military experience indicating the excessive dominionist christian extremist influence.  Many around me were afraid to be noticed for not going along.  BTW, this wasn't some out of the way outpost.  It was Andrews AFB.
I merely read the title of this blog and am ready to vote "yes!"  Nothing has made me feel more like a Jew in Hitler's early Nazi Germany, waiting to find out I've been lying to myself, my life is in danger, and I only wish I'd emigrated years ago...

Don't call them "terrorists".  

They might get angry and start blowing things up!

I read the articles.  There was nothing in it about murdering airline crews, taking over planes and flying them into towers, killing thousands of people.  Didn't mention wrapping themselves in bombs and blowing up people in train stations and night clubs.  No discussion of kidnapping people and cutting their heads off while still alive, videotaping and publishing the horrendous murder.  Do we really think that expressing obnoxious opinions and getting into a street brawl is terrorism?
I did read the first article and I had heard about the letting people die debacle and I cannot manage to read more than 1 thing about tea partiers at one time.  The point folks seem to be making is where we want to draw the boundaries with the word terrorist. 
Exactly, they may be more psychologically stable than Al Qaeda now, but there are all kinds of terrorists and just because the Tea Party isn't flying airplanes into buildings doesn't necessarily mean they aren't terrorists.

I'm new to this site. I thought it was for "intelligent thinking" non-theists. Instead, I find that the site is overrun with left-wingish communist-leaning people spewing hate at people with differing views. While you guys have shunned "god," you fail to recognize that having the government be god is just as bad, and perhaps worse. I mean, a "god" who has a jail, and hired guns who have the power to throw me in the jail, isn’t my idea of good god; I think that "old man in the sky" is sounding better all the time.

I actually attend a monthly Tea Party meeting. People from many walks of life attend. I live in Kentucky, so yes, it is mostly Christians in attendance (but then, you would find mostly Christians at a Democrat meeting, too; just how it is around here). That said, the meeting is not religious, and in fact the moderator of the meeting made a point to state that the Tea Party doesn't take a stand on many matters in the "moral" category, such as abortion or gay marriage (beyond their belief that those sort of things are states’ rights issues). You guys might be shocked to know that black folks come, too, and a few of them are very active. And in recent voting (e.g., Florida Straw Poll), the Tea Party dominated group cast more votes for Herman Cain than for any of the white dudes. I also want to point out that being nontheist and having right-wing political views are not mutually exclusive.

As for Ron Paul, the guy is a fringe sort of person. He is a libertarian, so he believes that you are responsible for you. Nonetheless, he is correct about how the churches/charities used to take care of those who can't care for themselves. That was the way it was back in the day. Look at the names of some of your oldest hospitals in town -- how many of you know of a "Baptist" or "St. Somebody" hospital? Louisville also has a Jewish Hospital. These were the charity hospitals back before the government started setting up their own (with our tax dollars). The charity hospitals of old did a good job of meeting the needs of the poor. At the core of the "healthcare" debate isn't a discussion of who gets healthcare; rather, it is a discussion of who should pay for it. I find a certain measure of irony when a "poor" person who can afford two packs of cigarettes a day and has cable TV with all the channels tells me he can't "afford" to pay for health insurance. Of course he can afford insurance, he just chooses to spend his money on other things that truly aren't needed, and then whines when he has no insurance to pay his medical bills when the inevitable day comes. The Tea Party folks simply want irresponsible people to be responsible for their own bills – and any honest-thinking person knows there is a huge difference between those who have truly been dealt a bad hand in life and those who are simply irresponsible. Using myself as an example, I’ve been self-employed most of my adult life, and have carried my own health insurance policy. When I was injured in an accident last year, I paid $1,100 of a $150,000 bill because I was deliberate for years on end in paying for health insurance that I frankly never used. I also had a little disability policy that paid about $6,000 in cash so I didn’t have to worry about paying bills when I couldn’t walk for over five months. I could have had a newer car with a car payment instead of the insurance; but I was RESPONSIBLE and chose health insurance over a shiny new car.  Oh yes, I almost forgot – I went straight to a hospital started by a bunch of Methodists about a 100 years ago (oh me).

Note that I said people from many walks of life attend Tea Party meetings; I didn’t say all walks of life. The "moocher class" never shows up. The moocher class is comprised of a fairly large number of people, theists and non, who are seeking to get something for "free" at the expense of those who are the producers among us. Tea Partiers are anti-moocher. They are not anti-gay, anti-black, anti-Jew, or even anti-atheist; only anti-moocher. The Tea Party is, on the whole, a group of people who want a constitutional government, with most of their energy focused upon the federal government. No, that doesn’t’ mean a dismantled government. Rather, it means making an effort to excise those parts of government that are not constitutional. The FEDERAL Department of Education is a great example of something that the Tea Party would like to see gone (education is a state responsibility, not a federal). Before you have a fit, do you realize that we did NOT have a Department of Education until one was set up by Jimmy Carter in 1980? We surely know that the US education quality has waned since the Department’s creation, and kids were certainly getting an education prior to 1980.

In closing, I fail to understand your hate of the Tea Party. The people are simply Americans exercising their right to gather together (1st amendment), and speak their peace (also 1st amendment). I’ve never once heard anyone at a Tea Party meeting voice anything that even hints at violence. Your link to a Huff Post (def not a reliable source) article about a person who claims to have been assaulted by a group of Tea Party nuts is wholly uncorroborated. Everyone in the story is nameless, and I wouldn’t be surprized if it is a total fabrication.

Me thinks you "non-theists" are upset that a group is attacking your god, I mean your government. <grin>




Update Your Membership :



Nexus on Social Media:

© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service