Mediaboss Marketing

Since the last midterm election in 2010, support for lawmakers who are willing to compromise has risen dramatically, reflecting a desire among voters for an end to the partisan gridlock in Congress.

In October 2010, a month before the election in which Republicans gained an historic number of seats in the House and regained control of the chamber, about a third of voters said they would prefer candidates willing to compromise. Nearly twice as many voters57%said they wanted candidates who would stick to their positions.

Those numbers have since reversed themselves, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. Now, half of Americans say they would prefer candidates willing to compromise, compared with 42% to want their candidates to stick to their guns.

Support for compromise-friendly lawmakers is highest among Democrats, 62% of whom say they want candidates who are willing to make deals. Just 32% of Democrats favor candidates unwilling to do so.

On the other side of the aisle, more Republicans54%prefer candidates who stick to their positions, compared to 37% who favor those who would compromise. Supporters of the conservative tea-party movement, unsurprisingly, are the least compromise-happyjust 32% of them prefer such candidates, compared to 60% who want hardline candidatesthe exact opposite of the split among Democrats. (That number has, however, decreased since 2010, when just a fifth said they would prefer deal-making candidates.)

Tea-party conservatives are renowned for their opposition to compromise. Lawmakers such as Texas Sen. Ted Cruz who are associated with the movement are famous for sticking to their positions. In the lead-up to the government shutdown last October, for example, Mr. Cruz did not back down from his attempt to defund the Affordable Care Acteven when it meant shutting down the government. In a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year, he called for candidates to defend their core beliefs above all else.

The latest poll shows that as support for compromise is on an upward trend, approval of the tea party is on its way down. Just 19% of Americans said they held a positive view of the movement, down from 30% who said the same in October 2010. And a fifth of Americans said they considered themselves supporters of the tea partydown from 30% four years ago.

Support has declined significantly among people who believe the economy will get worse, men over the age of 50, people making more than $75,000 a year, and people who would prefer a Republican-controlled Congress, among other groups. Among Republicans, 37% consider themselves supporters of the tea partydown from 57% in October 2010.

The poll, which surveyed 1,000 adults from Oct. 8-12, has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3.1%.

Full October poll coverage:

Read this article:
Tea Party Further Out of Favor as Compromise Gains WSJ/NBC News Poll

The news media continues to either mock the tea party or declare that it is dead and gone. Members of the grass-roots movement know that as long as Americans believe in fiscal conservatism, personal liberty and founding values, the tea party remains a potent brew with a lot of potential. One lawmaker in particular is also convinced of this Rep. Michele Bachmann, who takes her case to the public Wednesday morning in an event to be aired live by C-SPAN.

The retiring Minnesota Republican will appear at the Heritage Foundation to deliver a speech titled The Tea Party: Continuing the Revolution in American Thought. She founded the House Tea Party Caucus in 2010 and has never backed down on her faith in the spontaneous phenomenon that emerged five years ago and has rattled opponents and critics ever since.

The tea party movement focuses on principles before politics and defending the Constitution rather than defending political parties. The media would have you believe that the tea party is a group of old white racists bought and paid for by Republicans. The Democrats shrugged off the massive crowds as fringe and unworthy of notice. Its only AstroTurf, they said. They were wrong, Mrs. Bachmann noted earlier this year.

In her speech, she will trace the rise of the modern tea party, its ongoing impact and implications for the midterms. More important, perhaps, the lawmaker will outline a unifying agenda to restore American greatness and opportunity. The event will be moderated by Tim Chapman, CEO of Heritage Action for America, and can be seen live at 10 a.m. ET on C-SPAN and online here: Heritage.org.

STILL NO NAME FOR ISLAMIC STATE WAR

Headlines vary when it comes to press coverage of the Islamic State conflict, with interchangeable references to ISIS and ISIL. And there is still no formal name no Desert Storm or Enduring Freedom a fact that the Pentagon acknowledged and dismissed without explanation almost two months ago. Critics suggest its a political ploy to ease the White House through events until the midterms are over and done with. Those who track the usage of words, phrases and mottoes in popular culture have also taken note.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and this is even more true when it comes to the Internet, Paul J.J. Payack tells Inside the Beltway. He is president of the Texas-based Global Language Monitor, which uses software to track buzzwords and language patterns in 50,000 media sources. No name from the side of the coalition forces simply means that the enemy will define the nature of the conflict, which we now see happening. With [the Islamic States] dramatic imagery of caliphates and crusades, they have apparently seized the imagination of disaffected youth, even in the West.

Mr. Payack has a few suggestions of his own for naming the war: Operation Levant Relief, Operation Desert Redux, Operation Middle East Rescue, Operation Kurdish Relief, Operation Iraqi Relief or combinations thereof. And note theres no mention of ISIS or ISIL, he says.

HILLARYS PREMIERE PARTY

There are fundraisers, and then there are significant fundraisers. Check out the upcoming, ultra-exclusive West Coast event with Hillary Clinton in the starring role, considered a coming out of sorts for Clintons possible run for president, says Tina Daunt, a correspondent for The Hollywood Reporter. Silver screen elites are falling all over themselves to be included in the Oct. 20 event, which already counts uber-producers Jeffrey Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg plus Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Michael F. Bennet on the guest list.

Here is the original post:
Inside the Beltway: Michele Bachmann reinvents the tea party

PETITE FILLE SIMULATOR : #39;O - Tea Party Simulator 2014 [FR]
UNE PETITE TASSE DE TH PETITE C*NN* ????!!!!! Achetez vos jeux de -50 -70% ici: http://www.kinguin.fr/7en/1mi Subscribe: http://www.youtube.com/user/RiffleStudio Ma Page Facebook ...

By: RiffleStudio

Read more:
PETITE FILLE SIMULATOR :'O - Tea Party Simulator 2014 [FR] - Video

Coordinates: 422113N 710309W / 42.3536N 71.0524W / 42.3536; -71.0524 (Boston Tea Party)

Source: W.D. Cooper. "Boston Tea Party.", The History of North America. London: E. Newberry, 1789. Engraving. Plate opposite p. 58. Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress (40)

American Colonies Boston Colony

England

The Boston Tea Party (initially referred to by John Adams as "the Destruction of the Tea in Boston"[2]) was a political protest by the Sons of Liberty in Boston, on December 16, 1773. The demonstrators, some disguised as American Indians, destroyed an entire shipment of tea sent by the East India Company, in defiance of the Tea Act of May 10, 1773. They boarded the ships and threw the chests of tea into Boston Harbor, ruining the tea. The British government responded harshly and the episode escalated into the American Revolution. The Tea Party became an iconic event of American history, and other political protests such as the Tea Party movement after 2010 explicitly refer to it.

The Tea Party was the culmination of a resistance movement throughout British America against the Tea Act, which had been passed by the British Parliament in 1773. Colonists objected to the Tea Act because they believed that it violated their rights as Englishmen to "No taxation without representation," that is, be taxed only by their own elected representatives and not by a British parliament in which they were not represented. Protesters had successfully prevented the unloading of taxed tea in three other colonies, but in Boston, embattled Royal Governor Thomas Hutchinson refused to allow the tea to be returned to Britain.

The Boston Tea Party was a key event in the growth of the American Revolution. Parliament responded in 1774 with the Coercive Acts, or Intolerable Acts, which, among other provisions, ended local self-government in Massachusetts and closed Boston's commerce. Colonists up and down the Thirteen Colonies in turn responded to the Coercive Acts with additional acts of protest, and by convening the First Continental Congress, which petitioned the British monarch for repeal of the acts and coordinated colonial resistance to them. The crisis escalated, and the American Revolutionary War began near Boston in 1775.

The Boston Tea Party arose from two issues confronting the British Empire in 1765: the financial problems of the British East India Company, and an ongoing dispute about the extent of Parliament's authority, if any, over the British American colonies without seating any elected representation. The North Ministry's attempt to resolve these issues produced a showdown that would eventually result in revolution.[3]

As Europeans developed a taste for tea in the 17th century, rival companies were formed to import the product from China.[4] In England, Parliament gave the East India Company a monopoly on the importation of tea in 1698.[5] When tea became popular in the British colonies, Parliament sought to eliminate foreign competition by passing an act in 1721 that required colonists to import their tea only from Great Britain.[6] The East India Company did not export tea to the colonies; by law, the company was required to sell its tea wholesale at auctions in England. British firms bought this tea and exported it to the colonies, where they resold it to merchants in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston.[7]

Until 1767, the East India Company paid an ad valorem tax of about 25% on tea that it imported into Great Britain.[8] Parliament laid additional taxes on tea sold for consumption in Britain. These high taxes, combined with the fact that tea imported into Holland was not taxed by the Dutch government, meant that Britons and British Americans could buy smuggled Dutch tea at much cheaper prices.[9] The biggest market for illicit tea was Englandby the 1760s the East India Company was losing 400,000 per year to smugglers in Great Britain[10]but Dutch tea was also smuggled into British America in significant quantities.[11]

Originally posted here:
Boston Tea Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Saying GOP control of the Senate is more important than any single candidate, a national tea party group threw its support Monday behind Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas the man the Tea Party Express had tried to unseat in this summers Republican primary.

The about-face underscored concerns within various factions of the conservative movement that the GOPs efforts to win control of the Senate could hinge on Mr. Roberts re-election, and reopened simmering questions about whether the tea party insurgency has helped or hurt Republicans electoral chances over the last four years.

After turning back a challenge from Milton Wolf, a tea party-backed candidate with no electoral experience, Mr. Roberts is now trying to rebuild trust within the GOP even as he fends off an independent candidate, Greg Orman.

SEE ALSO: Tom Cotton: Mark Pryor simply isnt tough enough to stand up to Obama

I think at the end of the day that tough primary battle against a pretty much nondescript tea party candidate exposed his weakness, and so far there is no real indication that he is bringing all of those people back, said Burdett A. Loomis, political science professor at Kansas University. If they go back, they are going to go back in the most begrudging way.

In order to try to push unity on Kansas Republicans, national establishment and tea party figures have parachuted into the state to do what they can to rescue Mr. Roberts campaign.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the partys 2008 presidential candidate, have stumped with Mr. Roberts, as have tea party favorites Sarah Palin and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, another hero of grass-roots conservatives, plans to campaign with Mr. Roberts later this month.

SEE ALSO: Gwyneth Paltrows neighbors lash out at Obama event: Abuse of power

GOP analysts, though, say the key to the race could be winning the support of Mr. Wolf, who has backed Gov. Sam Brownbacks re-election bid, but has not endorsed Mr. Roberts.

The difficulty he has is Dr. Wolf has still not endorsed him even though a good number of Wolf supporters see the wisdom of endorsing Roberts because power of the Senate could be at stake, said Matt Hickam, a Kansas-based GOP consultant.

See more here:
Pat Roberts gets tea party backing in Kansas