'Coffee Party' seeks cooperation, solutions

patric said on March 12, 2010 at 7:36 AM

A little honesty in reporting would be nice. Like if WFAA reported that the founder of this group, Annabel Park is a former Strategy Analyst at the NY Times who was one of organizers and operators of the United for Obama video channel at YouTube:A filmmaker in charge of creating video clips that played a role in increasing support for Senator Barack Obama, the frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. This is not a "grass roots" organization to bring people together, it is a astro turf, wildly partisan group.

bro77dog said on March 12, 2010 at 8:11 AM

^ the pot calling the kettle black

ssutherlin727132 said on March 12, 2010 at 8:35 AM

If you think we're astroturf, please watch the clip again. do we *look* like we have any corporate backing? :) There is suspicion and skepticism all around. It does not surprise me to see it directed at the Coffee Party. But I think it is fed by a policial climate of aggression and fear that drew people to the Coffee Party in the first place. We really are grassroots. If you had come to the meetup, you would have seen that. You are absolutely welcome to come to any of the city-wide meetings tomorrow. Speaking for myself, all I want is to improve the climate and bring civility and citizenship back into politics.

selftaught said on March 12, 2010 at 9:52 AM

This is what I have been waiting to see, a moderate middle instead of I don't like any of your ideas, but I don't have any either!

rlayne said on March 12, 2010 at 9:59 AM

I had actually mentioned that I'm non-partisan and the group is non-partisan. We had Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and self-proclaimed Tree-Huggers at the meeting last night as well. We met from 8 to 10:40 p.m. and the discussion was varied and lively...and respectful. This is motivated from the bottom up. The people you see in this video came together on the Join the Coffee Party in Dallas, TX Facebook page and joined to meet in person. It can be scary to build something from nothing when all we have is a general idea of what we want to do. These everyday, regular people are the bottom, are the grassroots and we are building this movement to our specifications, not someone else's. What came of last night's meeting was the desire to create a new political culture, to inform ourselves as well as provide resources for others. We want to be informed voters and we also want to know - from our current administration - how we can best communicate with them.

mayflowers said on March 12, 2010 at 10:01 AM

Hmmm - seems patric WAS being honest - Annabel Park did form it and it is definitely (from what I read on it elsewhere on the internet) PRO Obama - soooo, what does it have to offer but what the White House is offering which a lot of Americans DON'T WANT????? Seems people who jump on this bandwagon better find out WHAT they are supporting - huh???

bro77dog said on March 12, 2010 at 10:14 AM

It's so funny how wing nut media tells us what Americans supposedly 'want'.

bware said on March 12, 2010 at 10:19 AM

patric, have you attended any meetings? If not, shut up. It's about time someone organized a group that represents people in general rather than being based on political affiliation. Who cares who organized it? It's the idea that matters. Something that is obviously foreign to you. Go back to your "Tea Party" group until you have viable ideas rather than just criticism. Which is the only thing you're good at.

aggiespirit said on March 12, 2010 at 11:48 AM

The so-called 'Coffee Party' is neither moderate, nor is it original at all. It is a liberal's response to seeing the growing popularity of the Tea Party(the founder is a vocal Obama/Liberal advocate). WFAA, CNN, and most of the major media outlets have been outright dishonest in their reporting on the 'Coffee Party'. It is nothing but a community activism group from the liberal perspective -- one that advocates a vast left leaning to hard left social and political agenda. Selftaught - the 'Coffee Party' is NOT a moderate middle --- it's founder is hard core left, and it's various local leaders are leftists/Democrats as well. Prove me wrong by finding me a Cofee Party leader who does not have a history of voting or supporting Democrats and/or Green/Socialists.

aggiespirit said on March 12, 2010 at 11:50 AM

rlayne - There is no creating a 'new political culture' with those who wish to fast track our nation to the hard left wing and socialist agenda (Democrats and their ilk). We need LESS political culture, and LESS government.

aggiespirit said on March 12, 2010 at 12:00 PM

bware - The Tea Party has proposed lots of ideas. Starting with policies which advocate lower taxation, less intrusive government, and allowing free and open markets to offer services rather than the government doing so. You want people who are affiliated with the tea party to 'shut up' until they have 'viable ideas rather than just criticism'. Seems to me that you oppose free speech for one, and additionally, you are qualifying ideas against a measure of how socialistic or left wing they are - else wise, you dismiss them as 'not viable'. In reality, the non-viable ideas are the ones that will bankrupt future generations and increase the tax burden on everyone. But you won't catch me telling anyone to just 'shut up' about their opinions. I actually believe in discussion, and reserve the right to criticize the worst President (Obama) and worst Congress we have ever had. After all -- weren't liberals, just a few years ago, calling criticism of Bush 'patriotic' ?

ssutherlin727132 said on March 12, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Someobody had to start the conversation and make the first move. it just happens that it was someone who had been a supporter of Obama. Mayflowers, I certainly understand your concern, but I decided not to let cynicism or suspicion control my outlook. I'm not getting everything I personally want from the government, but I don't expect to in a democracy. That what compromise and consensus means. What is it that you think the Obama administration is offering that some people don't want?

rlayne said on March 12, 2010 at 12:30 PM

Aggiespirit, You DO realize that less government means less military (which is a socialist entity, btw, as are the fire departments.) Less military means...we're invaded by another country and would no longer be America. The coffee party is BOTH left and right. It is NEITHER left or right. And we don't stereotype people, as you have done by calling the Democrats socialists. I can say I've joined in some reason as a response to the Tea Party. Those that I have encountered first hand are angry, unwilling to do their research and jump on board because of buzz words. They have shown violence toward me, a person they don't even know, because I happened to be walking by. (I am not stereotyping the entire party, only giving a first-hand account.) BTW, I don't have a history of voting Democratic party, neither did the Republicans and Independents that showed up to meet last night. I suggest getting information and doing research before you label people.

ssutherlin727132 said on March 12, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Aggiespirit, it's clear that the Coffee Party is not for you. I respect that. I hope you are engaged in politics in some other fashion that is more to your taste. Our government needs your input. Let's keep the conversation going, and let's keep it constructive.

aggiespirit said on March 12, 2010 at 1:24 PM

rlayne - One of the Constitutional responsibilities of our government is to provide for a common defense. To somehow call the existence of the military as being 'socialist' in nature is ridiculous. A military is required for the defense of the Republic. The powers the Constitution does not grant are the very things that the hard core left in this country seeks -- powers like running our healthcare system, fiscally punishing those who opt not to have health insurance, interference in family and penal code within state boundaries, and the entitlement system in this country. It was never the intent of our Constitution for our government to assume powers outside of those enumerated to it. Moving beyond those enumerated powers is tantamount towards more government control and interference in our daily lives.The military's existence is not socialistic, nor should it be politicized. Community/City services are controlled by the local community - this is not socialism either.