Surrounded by Seattle liberals, tea-party group feels isolated

[Crow]

Life is lonely as a Seattle Tea Party Patriot. All around you: Liberals. Democrats. Obama supporters. People who think Dan Savage is really cool.


From left, Greg Moon, Keli Carender and Mark Young are three members of the Seattle Tea Party Patriots.

Oh, the loneliness of being a Seattle Tea Party Patriot, especially after this last election.

All around you: Liberals. Democrats. Obama supporters. People who think Dan Savage is really cool.

"It's getting harder and harder for me. I was at Trader Joe's, and I was glaring at everyone around me," says Keli Carender, 33, co-organizer of the local group.

Carender's glaring took place at the Trader Joe's in the University District, a neighborhood that, for sure, is a bastion of libs.

"I kept thinking I was surrounded by people who are destroying freedom,"says Carender. "It's starting to make me angry, not wanting to be around these people."

Carender might be familiar to some because she made national news back in February 2009 for putting together the first ever tea-party protest — at Westlake Park, with 120 or so people attending. Carender now works for the national Tea Party Patriots.

She says she's seriously thinking about moving after her husband, Conor McNassar, a University of Washington math and physics major, is done with school.

They're thinking maybe Texas, maybe Eastern Washington, a long ways from where she grew up on Mercer Island.

Continued

Moving to Eastern Washington won't do her much good in the long run (politically speaking)..... Better stick with Texas.

[lxskllr]

They should try to get protected minority status.

[Crow]

I think it's too late. The damage has been done.

If they despise life in Washington so much, they should move to neighboring Idaho (they're as solid red as we are blue).

[Snusdog]

Man whatever you do................just don't send them to SC

I don't care what side of the debate they are on.............we have enough whining self-proclaimed victims here to last us for quite some time

Idaho sounds good..........let's go with that

[Joe234]

Man whatever you do................just don't send them to SC

I don't care what side of the debate they are on.............we have enough whining self-proclaimed victims here to last us for quite some time

Idaho sounds good..........let's go with that

Idaho. Yea. They can join up with Aryan Nations.

[Skell18]

Why don't they just leave instead of whinging in a newspaper about it! No sympathy from me, and you should NEVER despise or hate someone because of their policical beliefs (unless its some serious shit like extremist islam or a nazi, that shit don't fly!). Why can't these people look past politcis for once, if they did that the world would be a nicer place to live, their children are going to have one huge therapy bill when they grow up!

[truthwolf1]

My liberal friends always make me laugh when they complain about paying taxes.

[texastorm]

We dont complain about paying taxes, we just believe the rich should pay more. In other words is I make 20k and pay 10% and you make 20 million, you should pay 90%... thereby making a nice round 100% and everyone lives prosperously. Because obviously if you make 20 million in a year your a villain, likely a tea party garbage spewing conservative, and likely you only pay 15-20% in taxes, and even though that is at least a million and up to 2 million and I got back 3k for having 3 kids its just not freakin fair.


At least that is how it would sound if some of them spouted the truth. Most liberals cover there communistic agenda with lies and excuses.

Now conservatives on the other hand I have a whole tirade of rants about there bs too, but I will save that for another thread. Before you go accusing me of wanting to stop your abortions and your weed for sale at the corner store, forget about that too, cause I am all for aborting babies, the more the better, heck it should be required in many cases based on IQ, and if you want to smoke some weed, dude... what was I talking about...man this is some good sh...


How is that for stirring the pot from both ends of the spoon. Hmm bad analogy one side of the spoon gave me a grease burn.

[BadAxe]

I feel bad for someone that glares at people for having different political beliefs. I feel bad for someone that wants to move because the despise other humans that have different political beliefs. Thats just pitiful. Election is over. Go back to your life, and live. Andf recognize human beings for what they are, human beings. Politics means so little in actual life, yet people base their whole lives around it. Just pitiful.

[Skell18]

I feel bad for someone that glares at people for having different political beliefs. I feel bad for someone that wants to move because the despise other humans that have different political beliefs. Thats just pitiful. Election is over. Go back to your life, and live. Andf recognize human beings for what they are, human beings. Politics means so little in actual life, yet people base their whole lives around it. Just pitiful.

Agreed

[texastorm]

I feel bad for someone that glares at people for having different political beliefs. I feel bad for someone that wants to move because the despise other humans that have different political beliefs. Thats just pitiful. Election is over. Go back to your life, and live. Andf recognize human beings for what they are, human beings. Politics means so little in actual life, yet people base their whole lives around it. Just pitiful.

If Nelson Mandela had listened to anything like this quote he would never have done a damn thing. Anyone watch the southpark episode about "smug" and the electric cars. Its fine to be smug, I mean after all my candidate never stood a chance, especially in my red state, and if he had somehow pulled out a mystery win, your damn right I would be smug too.

BUT I WOULD NEVER ASK ANYONE TO KEEP THEIR OPINION TO THEMSELVES....

It's certainly unconstitutional, goes against our founding principals, and furthermore that my mislead friend is about as un-American as being forced to pay for something.


Some days I think our forefathers would weep if they saw what people are saying, but other days I realize that people said the same stupid BS back then too.

[BadAxe]

If Nelson Mandela had listened to anything like this quote he would never have done a damn thing. Anyone watch the southpark episode about "smug" and the electric cars. Its fine to be smug, I mean after all my candidate never stood a chance, especially in my red state, and if he had somehow pulled out a mystery win, your damn right I would be smug too.

BUT I WOULD NEVER ASK ANYONE TO KEEP THEIR OPINION TO THEMSELVES....

It's certainly unconstitutional, goes against our founding principals, and furthermore that my mislead friend is about as un-American as being forced to pay for something.


Some days I think our forefathers would weep if they saw what people are saying, but other days I realize that people said the same stupid BS back then too.

I am not asking anyone to keep their opinions to themselves. I am saying, she has problems living with people that believe differently then her. Instead of accepting that they believe differently, and accepting that and still viewing them as human beings, not as something they can not even be around. And now that the election is over, its time to look to the future and hope that the current Pres can actually do a good job abd make things better, since he does now have the job for the next 4 years. I mean, rooting for him to fail only means a worse life for even those that did not vote for him. So why not hope you are wrong (not you, but those that condem whoever wins) because life will be better if you are proven wrong.

I don't understand how you extend your political view to actually judge someone as a person based soley on their political beliefs. Mandela did not do that I am quite sure. You have different political beliefs than I? Thats fine. And we can debate them during the time when our candidates are running. If your candidate wins? Thats ok, and I will not treat you differently in any aspect of life. I will not glare at you, or want to move away from you because you believe differently than I.

So not sure how you misinterpreted my post so awfully, but I posted nothing that would be considered unconstitutional, and I am surely not mislead. I believe in treating people as people, and if they believe differently than i, thats their right. Yep, I am a mislead, uneducated bad bad person. Wow.

[texastorm]

I am not asking anyone to keep their opinions to themselves. I am saying, she has problems living with people that believe differently then her. Instead of accepting that they believe differently, and accepting that and still viewing them as human beings, not as something they can not even be around. And now that the election is over, its time to look to the future and hope that the current Pres can actually do a good job abd make things better, since he does now have the job for the next 4 years. I mean, rooting for him to fail only means a worse life for even those that did not vote for him. So why not hope you are wrong (not you, but those that condem whoever wins) because life will be better if you are proven wrong.

I don't understand how you extend your political view to actually judge someone as a person based soley on their political beliefs. Mandela did not do that I am quite sure. You have different political beliefs than I? Thats fine. And we can debate them during the time when our candidates are running. If your candidate wins? Thats ok, and I will not treat you differently in any aspect of life. I will not glare at you, or want to move away from you because you believe differently than I.

So not sure how you misinterpreted my post so awfully, but I posted nothing that would be considered unconstitutional, and I am surely not mislead. I believe in treating people as people, and if they believe differently than i, thats their right. Yep, I am a mislead, uneducated bad bad person. Wow.

I watched for the last few years as these horrible occupy people camped out on lawns across the country and there wasn't an election looming on the horizon. So good for them, as long as they want to shout whatever rhetoric their side believes, I am all for it.

If someone wants to get on a roof and shout about how cancer is from God and Satan is Chemo... good for them too.

It makes no difference if you agree or don't. If you don't agree you belittle them. If you do you praise their efforts. That's human nature. But it doesn't make it right. No more than killing a doctor outside an abortion clinic does. But if you want to stand in front of one with a sign protesting them, good for you. Shout off the mountaintops. Same thing if you for abortions, hold your sign high.

My point is even what your saying is valid, though I disagree. I don't hold it against you for having an opinion... I think about the subject differently. Both our opinions have merit and both are free for us to say... so is theirs... though we may disagree and find their efforts futile.

[BadAxe]

I watched for the last few years as these horrible occupy people camped out on lawns across the country and there wasn't an election looming on the horizon. So good for them, as long as they want to shout whatever rhetoric their side believes, I am all for it.

If someone wants to get on a roof and shout about how cancer is from God and Satan is Chemo... good for them too.

It makes no difference if you agree or don't. If you don't agree you belittle them. If you do you praise their efforts. That's human nature. But it doesn't make it right. No more than killing a doctor outside an abortion clinic does. But if you want to stand in front of one with a sign protesting them, good for you. Shout off the mountaintops. Same thing if you for abortions, hold your sign high.

My point is even what your saying is valid, though I disagree. I don't hold it against you for having an opinion... I think about the subject differently. Both our opinions have merit and both are free for us to say... so is theirs... though we may disagree and find their efforts futile.

I agree with you. If you want to protest, or want your opinion heard, scream it as loud as you wish. I am just talking about how people should actually treat people, or how we should live amongst each other. I understand the difference in beliefs, and its all of our rights. At the end of the day though, we should see past that when it comes to how we treat people. Once away from the subject of the debate (whatever that issue may be) there is no reason to hate someone, to glare at someone, going into a restaurant, cause you feel they believe differently than you. When in the arena for debate, sure, , but when out and about in life, no reason to treat someone like crap because in one area or the other there are opposing beliefs. I guess what I am saying is there is more to life than politics. So once outside the debate of politics, treat people as human beings, even if they hold a different set of beliefs than you. When in the arena of politics (or whatever other subject is being debated), I can understand the rush of emotion, whether good or bad), but outside of that, I would view that person as a person. I would not feel I want to move away from that person becuase he believes differently than I in some subject or the other.

The whole basis of my reply was not really anything to do with politics. It was just the statement form the article that stated she stood outside of a store glaring at people. ANd then she felt she wanted to move away from people tha lived in this area, all because she feels they have different political beliefs. It was a store people were entering, not a political arena. There was no reason for anyone to stand there glaring at people living their lives, because of a perceived political belief. If she stood outside of a political convention glaring at the opposite party people, thats one thing. But people walking into a Trader Joe's, just going shopping? Sorry, but political opinions mean nothing at that point. Why look at people going shopping as someone to look at in a negative light? I don't know, I guess i am very bad at expressing what I am trying to express. I believe in everyone's right to voice their opinion on any subject. But I do not believe that a difference in beliefs should make people glare, or hate, or move away from a person, or group of people, just because of that particular belief. We are all huan beings living our lives, and once that paricular debate is over, we move still just go on living our lives.

I am not a political person much at all, and I get pretty mad come election time when I see the extrmemists and their beliefs, where i think they are completely wrong (just my belief). So when I see postings, or hear people debating, I can get pretty angry at those beliefs. That being said, I believe in their right to hold those beliefs, and speak of them. Even if it makes me angry. But away from that platform, I am not angry at them, nor do I wish to move away from them, and in fact, I am friends with some of them. So thats what I mean. When it comes to life, a difference of opinion is just that, a difference of opinion. Push it aside, and move on with your life, treating that person just as anothe human being.

Ok, my rant is done. And I recognize your right to your beliefs as well. I think we mostly agree here, but just are not quite understanding each others view.

[Darwin]

There seems to be an unwarranted assumption when increasing taxes on the "rich" is bandied about that rich people are stupid. Stupid in the sense that they will just roll over and pay higher taxes with no inclination to move funds about and take advantage of whatever tax law will allow to keep the government's hands off as much as possible. This is the primary reason that tax increases never, ever, produce anywhere near the projected amounts of revenue increase.

The truly wealthy rarely earn an actual salary and their incomes are almost entirely investment based so changing investment patterns, moving funds into tax havens like municipal bonds for example, is a common strategy. Now one can argue that such havens as tax free Munis constitute a "loophole" but once such tax structure is in place for a long period of time changing them invokes the ire of the affected parties (in this case every state, county, and local government in the country) who bring enormous pressure to bear on the federal legislature. It's only human nature to want to protect what one has and governments can legislate 'till the heat death of the universe without that ever changing.

The president, in an interview with Chris Wallace some weeks before the election admitted that even if increases in taxes on the rich were to prove harmful to the economy he would still want to pursue it as a basic issue of "fairness". Hard to imagine that this attitude would not cause economists of every philosophical bent, left, right, libertarian, whatever, to cringe in dismay.