Thousands of Tea Parties Planned for April 15
WorldNetDaily reported this weekend that they’ve been tracking more than 2,000 tea parties set to occur on April 15 across the nation:
While WND has been tracking 400 individual tea parties across the nation, the American Family Association has announced its count is nearing 1,600 – for Tax Day alone.
The AFA, planned to coordinate 1,000 Taxed Enough Already, or TEA, parties to be held at 12 p.m. on April 15 in front of city halls across the nation.
But the group is pleasantly surprised as is stands to double that goal before Tax Day is here.
“Our goal was to have a TEA party in 1,500 cities. We are nearly 100 cities above our goal and still growing,” said Donald E. Wildmon, AFA chairman.
The AFA sponsored TEA parties are in addition to hundreds of parties planned by other groups. Taxpayers are also organizing tea parties for Independence Day and various Saturdays so people with conflicting work schedules may attend.
The article goes on to list scores of locations and contact info for the ones WND is tracking. PajamasMedia TV is intending to broadcast the parties.
You can RSVP your intentions of joining a party here.
A great Google Maps of at least 2 pages worth of locations can be found here.
The two top tea party web sites are TaxDayTeaParty.com (from whom I received my tea party widget on the sidebar) and Speaker Newt’s affiliate, TeaPartyDay.com which, per se, claims 1,799 parties (as of this posting) with 2,573 organizers.
Other sites include the following:
-Phil
Similar Posts:
- Tea Party: The Results; July 4, 2009 is Next; GOP Rep BOO’ED for TARP Vote
- Tea Party Update: Party on DC, Sites Tracking More Tea Parties, and Obama Didn’t Know?
- Tea Party Update: Political Change is Afoot
- Tea Parties Forming Across the Nation; Many Occurring Tomorrow
- Presidential Power Grab: Obama to Move Census from Commerce to Executive; Pork Included
Blake says:
“I don’t care about that”
Let’s see, you don’t care that what you are asking for has no requirement under the law but you want it anyway. Here’s a news flash for you, what you want doesn’t matter. What matters is the law. And there is NO law that says that Obama has to demonstrate his eligibility to any private citizen. Work to change the law if you don’t like it. But you don’t get to make up laws. You and every other citizen, including “Dr Polarnik” and “Sandra Raimes Lines”, had the opportunity to personally examine Obama’s BC at his HQ. Why didn’t you? Why didn’t Polarnik and Lines? Fox News did. Have you contacted Andrew Napolitano yet? If Polarnik and Lines agree that you cannot tell anything from an internet posting of a scan of a copy, then why didn’t they go look at the real thing? Document experts take a pass on the opportunity to examine the real document. Quite odd. The common theme that I see from all anti-Obama-nicks is that they refuse to look at information that refutes their point of view. They don’t even look at it and dismiss it, they just pretend it doesn’t exist. Very telling.
There are nearly four years left, and I do not share your assumption that there is no more legal ground to cover.
He would not simply be allowed to provide this document. All documents relevant to his citizenship status would come into the light during the discovery process.
You are free to assume this, but I do not.
Sure – he is wisely making a mockery of his promise of transparency because his advisers know that people will expect continued transparency. I stand corrected! I also get a laugh out of your desire to paint him with a noble intention – your penchant for such assumptions has become apparent during our back and forth on this subject. Regarding the number of people in question, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of people who have signed a petition on the matter, and, as with any petition, these signers represent a dramatically larger number of people who hold the same view. An AOL poll on the subject revealed the same. And I’m not sure why it matters how many of them there are in the first place – the fact is that there is a public outcry for him to stop blocking the release of his basic documentation, as per his promise of “transparency”, and he is refusing. It is indefensible any way you slice it. In addition, while I am quite sure you don’t care about their opinions, you should care when you are lied to and manipulated by someone who wants to take power over you – apparently your partisanship has robbed you of your basic sensibilities.
Let me also point out that saying “B-words” is no better than using the dismissive label you are referencing in doing so. Allow me to illustrate the pointless, partisan nature of your continual use of this label by constructing the same paragraph without it:
“He is wisely asking for the cases to be dismissed because his advisers know that nothing will satisfy those who doubt him and it would only just lead to other actions and more questions about minutia. They represent such a small faction that they do not deserve any more attention than it takes file a few briefs and motions for dismissal. I could care less about their opinion.”
Once again – your need to latch onto derisive labels doesn’t reflect well on you. I hope you can do better than that.
He is hiding his birth certificate, college records, university records, and medical records. He is hiding his lifelong history of indoctrination by and alliance with Communists and Socialists. He is hiding the nature of his religion. He is hiding the fact that he owns a mansion bought with the help of a criminal slumlord. He is not just hiding something, he is hiding a lot.
Obama’s blatant misrepresentation of himself is an insult to your intelligence. If you don’t feel insulted, that says quite a bit about the mind-numbingly partisan nature of your support of this corrupt, racist, Marxist scumbag.
I am simply stating facts.
No… why?
Blake
Berg, Taitz, Donofrio and other B-words have tried every conceivable angle on standing and gotten nowhere. If you want to believe someone, somehow, someday will find an angle, be my guest. No court will force Obama to produce a “vault copy” of his birth certificate because there is no basis in law for any court to do that. The one he produced is valid for any federal requirement. You can argue it is a forgery if you like but that would be determined by this hypothetical court and I have no doubts it would be validated.
Obama is not hiding anything. He is wisely asking for the cases to be dismissed because his advisers know that nothing will satisfy the B-words and it would only just lead to other actions and more questions about minutia. The B-words represent such a small faction that they do not deserve any more attention than it takes file a few briefs and motions for dismissal. I could care less about the opinion of the B-words. I do not feel “let down” or “betrayed”. As a matter of fact I am prouder of America and its leadership than I have been in many years.
The fact that you and a small minority think he is intentionally concealing anything sinister makes me pity you.
RE: Virginal Tech
Are you the author of this article? I was merely speculating.
http://www.humanevents.com/rightangle/index.php?p=22093
Reality Check:
I am almost afraid to ask…
That’s odd, because his assertion was challenged and has not been backed up.
You don’t seem to realize that different parties have different claims to standing, and that it only takes one to crack this open and shed light on what you want to be kept in the dark.
How does that feel, by the way? How does it feel to be in the unenviable position of having to defend Obama’s refusal to release his basic documentation after he promised “transparency” to get you to vote for him? I don’t know about you, but I get angry when I’ve been had. Apparently we differ there, because you seem to have no problem with the fact that he is concealing his basic documentation from birth certificate to college records to university records to medical records… concealing his lifelong history of indoctrination by and alliance with Communists and Socialists… concealing the nature of his religion… concealing the fact that he owns a mansion bought with the help of a criminal slumlord… etc. It is quite disturbing that you don’t mind being lied to and manipulated.
I can say that because it has already been adjudicated. I don’t need a crystal ball. I merely need to be able to read. What is going to change that? Answer: Nothing. If the Supreme Court decided not to intervene when they could have affected the election they certainly will not do so when it is just for show. They made clear in Bush v Gore that the election ends with the state selection of electors. In that ruling they chose to stop a state ordered recount early to make sure that the election process was not disturbed. To think that they would retroactively reopen that process in 2009 is silly.
Even if, in another world, they decided to get involved Congress would rightfully give them the single finger salute.