Welcome to the First Coast Tea Party
Herman Cain for President?
I'm liking Herman Cain, but I found this post on a Presidential Poll website. Anyone know if any of it's true? Frances
Richard Blauvelt3:51 pm
Make NO MISTAKE about Herman Cain. Herman Cain is NO conservative. He is NO Tea Party candidate. He is an establishment Republican In Name Only. His positions on past issues are all we need to know that a Herman Cain presidency would not shrink the size of government, increase your liberties, or return America to its Constitution.
The Truth About Herman Cain.
DID YOU KNOW?
1. Herman Cain supported the TARP bailouts. He even wrote a column to vigorously argue in favor of the Wall Street bailout in 2008, writing: "Wake up people! Owning a part of the major banks in America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a problem." Cain derided opponents of the bailouts as "free market purists." That sounds more like something Rachel Maddow would call Tea Partiers than something a true Tea Partier would use as an insult.
2. Herman Cain enthusiastically endorsed Mitt Romney for President in 2008. Herman Cain called Mitt Romney his "No. 1 choice" for president. Remember that Mitt "RINO" brought socialized medicine to Massachusetts as governor, and his "RomneyCare" legislation would eventually form the blueprint for ObamaCare, which all true Tea Partiers strongly opposed! How can a "Tea Party candidate" like Herman Cain endorse someone like Mitt Romney for president?
3. Herman Cain opposes an audit of the Federal Reserve. Actually a former chairman of the Federal Reserve bank of Kansas City, Herman Cain opposes an audit of the Federal Reserve bank and supports its continued existence and manipulation of our dollar. This isn't even just a Tea Party issue. 80% of ALL AMERICANS want an audit of the Fed. Herman Cain doesn't.
You have a responsibility to your country not to let your fellow Americans be fooled by the false impression Herman Cain is working hard to cultivate about himself.
Please share this article with everyone you know-- especially people who have been fooled by Herman Cain's excellent speaking skills and carefully calculated lip service to the Tea Party's values. Herman Cain's record clearly shows that he supports bank bailouts, socialized medicine on a federal level, and the Fed's continued manipulation of the dollar to provide "stimulus" to the economy and enable Washington's runaway deficit spending. Herman Cain is NO TEA PARTY CANDIDATE.
At this time of crisis, America CANNOT afford to elect someone with such a spotty record of positions and endorsements. We absolutely must elect someone with a die-hard record of unyielding commitment to liberty, someone who we absolutely KNOW will shrink the size, role, and influence of the government in Washington. There are only two such candidates on the Republican field today: Rep. Ron Paul and Gov. Gary Johnson.
Thank you for reading.
Wes Messamore,
Editor in Chief, THL
Views: 449
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jack on
-
Things get spun so many ways and taken out of context in so many different ways. Just like in the last debate. Newt repeated himself half a dozen times that he was not for amnesty for illegals. That those with criminal records and no family here should be deported. Yet Michelle Bachman kept saying that he was for amnesty and wanted to give 11 million illegals citizenship. I have it on DVR, THAT WAS NOT WHAT HE SAID. Same with all three of the statements made above about Herman Cain.
1st, yes he supported the TARP bailouts at first but they were not implemented anywhere near the way that they were suppose to be implemented. Being for rain when your in a drought does not mean that you want your house washed away in a flood.
2nd, Mitt Romney (who I dislike) was still well to the right of John McCain (who I dislike even worse), so last time I too would have prefered Romney to get the nomination over McCain. The press and the republican establishment always try to nominate the most liberal candidate they can. Last time that was McCain and thats who we ended up with. This time it is Romney and unless we get our act together, again that is exactly who we will get and in my opinion if we end up nominating Romney, Obama will get reelected. WE THE PEOPLE really only have three true conservative candidates (that really support us) to choose from this time, Bachman, Cain and Gingrich. However, I don't really think that Bachman has a snowballs chance in hell of getting the nomination. So our only real choice is between Cain and Gingrich. (Cain/Gingrich 2012 would make a perfect ticket)
3rd, Herman Cain is not opposed to auditing The Federal Reserve, he is the one trying to abolish the IRS. He has said repeatedly and even told Ron Paul in one of the debates that he agrees with auditing The Federal Reserve but that with all of the current problems facing the country right now that require immediate attention that it is not one of his top priorities, btw I have that debate on DVR too.
So be very careful about what people have supposedly said when you didn't actually hear them say it. Things can be spun in any direction and can be taken completely out of context.
-
Permalink Reply by John Sauer on
-
I agree with Jack's assessment of Romney and his analysis of our choices of Bachman, Cain and Gingrich. I have a different perspective in arriving at this conclusion. See Steering Conservatives to the Weakest Candidate
It is good to take a close look at the candidates, but I find it helpful to step back and look at the big picture once in a while to keep from having to rely on the excuse "I didn't see the forest for the trees". I've been there.
-
Permalink Reply by Roma and Tom Cox on
-
1. I often hear that we must elect someone who is "electable" even if he/ she is the lesser of two evils. I thought for some time this might make sense until I read this quote from Ayn Rand:
"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube . . .
When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it’s picked up by scoundrels—and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil."Allen West, and Rand Paul were not considered "electable". But the Tea Party, not the GOP made them electable.
2. I also think we need to look closely at the FCTP Mission Statement, and decide who is closest to making that happen.
-
-
It never ceases to amaze me how the "conservatives" pretend to support the constitution... except all the parts they don't like.
-
-
Douglas, if you read the mission statement, it says the Constitution is a major focus for us. It is just that many of us are still studying the Constitution. Please feel free to tell us where we contradict the Constitution.
Here is the Mission Statement:
The First Coast Tea Party’s mission is to promote the principles of our founding fathers – individual liberty and responsibility, limited government and moral leadership.
We believe our mission statement is concise, focused and hopefully speaks to ALL Americans.
The tea party movement strives to embrace the concerns of all Americans, to focus on the issues, to inform the electorate of the activities of “our” government and to share ideas on how to restore our country to a constitutional footing intended by our founding fathers.
Those Americans who participate in the Tea Party Movement are free thinkers and individuals who want to be a part of “their” government, regain their liberties and fulfill the God given promises set forth in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
The tea party movement places no labels on anyone and is open to all who share our mission and want to have a voice in America’s future.
We are a nonprofit, grassroots group comprised of Americans of all walks of life who contribute their individual skills to the effort. Our primary tools are personal conversations, letters, rallies, visits to the offices of elected officials, telephone calls, discussion groups, educational and informational sessions, media coverage, news releases and independent Tea Party groups.
We are NOT affiliated with any political parties or interest groups.
The First Coast Tea Party founded in Jacksonville, Florida is powered by participants who volunteer sincerely in the movement.
We are patriots who believe elected officials are sworn to serve the country and their constituents transparently. They should be motivated by a desire to preserve and protect America and to uphold the principles that assure ALL Americans of thier constitutional rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
We are proud to be Americans and firmly believe in its youth and its future.
-
-
Douglas! You put your comment on a Tea Party website not a progressive site. You can state a generalization but you need to provide specifics if you want to be taken seriously. Got any specifics? While you are thinking about it you can peruse this site:The Conservative Citizen You might get some ideas, or not.
Douglas Newberry said:It never ceases to amaze me how the "conservatives" pretend to support the constitution... except all the parts they don't like.
-
-
I could go down the list of the Bill of Rights and expose "conservatives" for all the crap they hold dear on a one by one basis... but that would only serve to engage the ones who would defend their unconstitutional beliefs.
I would bet every conservative would say that the government has no place telling them how much salt to eat or beer to drink but are perfectly comfortable spending a trillion dollars locking up pot smokers.
Our founders believed in a strict non-interventionist policy but conservatives support the wars of aggression with idiotic sayings like "we gotta support the troops" even when the troops support noninterventionism.
They say they support and defend the constitution and then stand up and support the patriot act... probably the most unconstitutional legislation of all time.
Conservatives like to pretend that they support the constitution and yet defend the federal reserve because they are afraid of congress controlling money supply as spelled out in article 1 secion 8.Conservatives claim to want small government but will support a BIG government position telling people who they can and cannot marry.
I could go on and on... but you get the idea.
Here is a clue for you... The Constitution for the United States is NOT a conservative document. You cannot legislate morality and when you try you are imposing tyranny.
It almost made my skin crawl when Newt said we need two sets of laws... ???? Hello? I am equally disgusted to see the rest of the neo-con idiots banging the war drums against Iran and Syria because they are "afraid".
How about this, build a strong national defense and pick your noses out of everyone elses business.
Is there anywhere in the Constitution that says constitutional rights are ONLY for American citizens... NO!
What conservatives fail to understand is that freedom is HARD... as in not easy and the freedom to do what you like is called LIBERTY!
The first amendment was designed specifically for speech that was UNPOPULAR and yet I watch on conservative boards while they cheer the OWS protestors being pepper sprayed for exercizing their rights to protest, assemble and voice their opinions. It is tragic hypocrisy.
It may interest you to know that my liberal friends think I am a raging right winger and my conservative friends think I am a liberal, so I must be a thinking man who is NOT falling victim to the pathetic ideologies of either side.
The truth has no agenda.
Also, I will not address any "rationalizations" for the misguided beliefs of conservatives who would endeavor to justify WHY they support legislation or policies that are against the constitution. It always comes down to "my thinking is right" and while I am sure they believe that to be the case... it is still unconstitutional.
John Sauer said:Douglas! You put your comment on a Tea Party website not a progressive site. You can state a generalization but you need to provide specifics if you want to be taken seriously. Got any specifics? While you are thinking about it you can peruse this site:The Conservative Citizen You might get some ideas, or not.
Douglas Newberry said:It never ceases to amaze me how the "conservatives" pretend to support the constitution... except all the parts they don't like.
-
-
Ok John, let me explain this election the way that I see it. We currently have two candidates, Mitt Romney and the Anti-Mitt Romney candidate. The Anti-Romney candidate just happens to be divided into seven different people. That is why Romney’s poll numbers have stayed consistent and why everyone else’s poll numbers have fluctuated the way that they have, because the Tea Party is evaluating all of the available candidates and adjusting their votes accordingly. Therefore, if anyone of the other seven candidates were to drop out or even if all six of the other candidates were to drop out the one remaining Anti-Romney candidate (regardless of who that is) would gain most if not all of those votes. So what we would end up with is an Anti-Romney candidate with 50%+ of the vote. Romney only looks good right now because the votes against him are spread too thin. That is what I was trying to explain in my earlier comment.
And let’s not fool ourselves. The Republican Establishment is not our friend. They are working against us (along with the Press) with everything that they have. They know that if the Tea Party is given the time to evaluate all of the candidates and be able to come to a more united decision that they will lose control over us, and of this election. They want the candidate who is the farthest left and closest to the center. Last time that was John McCain. This time it’s Mitt Romney and that is exactly who they are trying to give us.
Just think about it. Why did they move all of the primaries up? It wasn’t for any other reason but to keep us, The Tea Party, from having the time we need to choose our own candidate. By moving the primaries up they are in effect pushing Romney on us while he is still in the lead. They know that once the other candidates start dropping out that it will become obvious to everyone that he is not the Tea Party’s candidate. As long as they can do that while we are still divided and spread out amongst all of the other candidates then they will get the candidate that they chose.
-
-
Like you say, John, the GOP will likely choose a candidate that the Tea Party does not want, and tell us everyone else is unelectable because the GOP does not support them . But remember what Ayn Rand said about the lesser of two evils. Also remember that there were Tea Parties that went against the establishment and made Rand Paul, Allen West, Michelle Bachmann, ext electable. We are not limited to GOP choices as per the Constitution.
-
-
Douglas, I have been studying, old documents, and Justice Joseph Story's book, and you make several valid points. However people are more likely to listen to you if you do not approach everyone here as an advisory.
-
-
There is no debating some people. They come on a Tea Party website when they are clearly a liberal and brainwashed by the democratic propoganda. You can give them logic, you can give them proof, you can give them all of the links and evidence that they could ever possibly have and your not going to be able to change their minds the least little bit. Because, remember that a liberal is always right and when they are not right it's always someone elses fault. It's an exercise in futility. Trying to have a logical, rational conversation with an irrational, illogical person.
-
-
Douglas!
Go ahead and engage. Isn’t that what this process is about? Your points are still generalizations. In point one you state that you have a lot of crap in your head that needs airing. I have this clothes pin for my nose. Since I am a conservative and a naturalized citizen of the United States of America I feel qualified to generally respond to your generalizations.
Point two is a true. The government has no business telling me how much salt I can eat or beer I can drink. Just don’t go out in public with more than a .08 blood alcohol level. I have never smoked pot or used drugs but from what I know about pot it makes you as stupid as, say a blood alcohol level > .16. That stupidity should not be displayed publicly in a civil society.
Point three is a huh?
The Patriot act of point four deals with national security which is within the constitutional scope of the federal government and was enacted in the aftermath of 9/11. Examples of unconstitutional legislation are Roe v Wade and America's Affordable Health Choices Act (Obamacare). Such matters are reserved to the states.
As for point 5, article 1section 8, the federal reserve needs a serious look. When the constitution was written all trade was finalized by barter or gold coin. Seeing the damage recent federal government policies have inflicted on the money supply it is easy for a reasonable American conservative to distrust congress.
Points 5.5 thru 7 are inverse logic applied to time honored definition of marriage in every country in the world for millennia. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Period. A society that relies on cohabitation between two men or two women has no future in any country. Period. It is not tyranny. It is common sense which the current federal government is trying to legislate out of our lexicon.
As a side note, I don’t see where the United States constitution attempts to legislate morality. Maybe you’ve got that notion reading the UN charter. The US constitution forms the basis for American conservatism.
Point eight: Newt is such a card! I am sure your tough talk against conservative weariness about Iran and Syria is a product of your perspective, but, my goodness, if Iran succeeds in delivering a nuclear missile to you where the sun don’t shine, I’m sure you will wind up with a herniated disc in your neck. Wouldn’t that hurt?
Point nine: If we ignored the other countries we wouldn’t need a military at all and you would have a herniated disc in your neck.
Point ten: I repeat my response to point three. You might be stuck in the UN charter here also.
Point eleven: We are all guaranteed the constitutional right to liberty. It is the exercise of the right that has limits. When your exercising of your rights imposes on my right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness your rights need to be curtailed and vice versa. I refer you to point two for an example.
Point twelve: The first amendment protects unpopular speech as you note. It does not protect public defecation, urination, intercourse, usurping public and private property and disrupting legitimate commerce. I refer you to point eleven.
Point thirteen: I agree with your conservative friends.
Also, I don’t know any conservatives that support unconstitutional legislation, so you are off the hook on point fourteen. I’m sure you think “your thinking is right”.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
National Debt Clock
The First CoastTea Party is a non-profit organization. We have no deep-pocketed special interest funding our efforts.
You may contact us at:
First Coast Tea Party
1205 Salt Creek Island Dr
Ponte Vedra, FL 32082
904-392-7475
Helpful Links
Blog Posts
RYAN NICHOLS - Hardened Criminal?? Seriously??
If you're not already aware. This is what's going on in DC while dangerous criminals are allowed back out on the streets. It's horrifying that this is happening to our citizens and veterans for protesting the hijacking of our election process. This is still happening! They are STILL being tortured and treated like full on terrorists.
You may not be aware of the typical things they're forced to go through...…
ContinuePosted by Babs Jordan on August 14, 2022 at 8:44am
© 2025 Created by LeadershipCouncil.
Powered by
