>>>The key to your statement is "seem to be". By whom? Journalists whose job is to promote sensationalism for ratings/subscriptions? Opponents whose job is to portray the worst aspects of the other side?
>>
>>These are first-hand impressions. I have an office on the downtown square and weekly get to see the Tea Party sign holders. The loudest ones are racist, name-calling bigots. I concede that my view is jaded by my local Tea Party racists.
>>
>>>By that standard, I offer that Obama's supporters seem to be nothing but noodle spined lap dogs who forgive anything their savior does even when they loudly and supposedly proudly protested the same actions by His predesessor.
>>
>>By the same token, the very same thing was true when W. was president and when Clinton was president and when Sr. was president and when Reagan was president, et al. It's always this way. Nothing new.
>>
>>
>>>It is one's protected right to be disrespectful to any individual, especially those chosen to represent us. Elected leaders are not to be treated as if placed on a pedestal, not in the USA. The citizenry is not required to humble themselves before an elected elite simply because they have been chosen to work for their electors. Elected leaders must be held to a higher standard due to the power we entrust with them.
>>
>>Never said politicians should be placed on a pedestal. You're distorting my words as though I was against free speech. That couldn't be further from the truth. I will defend anyones right to free speech until the end. Free Speech, however, doesn't justify the disrespectful, immature, name-calling, middle finger waving behavior. This disgusting, disrespectful behavior only alienates people who might otherwise endorse the movement.
>>
>>>Please define "stalled".
>>
>>I've first hand watched the sign holders go from 60 to 15. They're so lazy now, I kid you not, they hold their signs while sitting in lawn chairs.
>>
>>
>>> A mere 6 months ago an election provided the greatest Congressional gain by a single party in 62 years. It was the biggest loss by a sitting President's party since 1938. The next election is 18 months away.
>>
>>You're confusing causation and correlation. To say the Tea Party is responsible is no more accurate than the claim that Xenu is responsible.
>>
>>
>>Jake, thanks for an intelligent thought-out response. We would have a good chat over a beer or two. If you choose to respond, I'll let you have the last word. I bid adieu.
>
>I agree with a lot of what you say here. In Jake's defense, I have generally found him to be thoughtful and fact based. He is conservative and proud of it but usually does not make statements as inflammatory as some of the wild eyed screamers.
>
>What I sometimes wonder is how he managed to stand four years at Berkeley ;-) a.k.a. The People's Republic of Berkeley.

5 years. It helped that as my time there progressed I kept moving further and further away from the campus. ;)