The Prince William Coffee Party Chapter has been formed and we will have our first coffee talk on March 13th, click here for details. We will be serving coffee, donuts, and free Coffee Party buttons to the first 50 people! Now Slowpoke, the buttons are to wear, not to throw! Seriously though, I really am hoping that people will take this opportunity to start having a civil dialogue. This is one of my favorite quotes that was posted on the Coffee Party Page:
“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone…, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again …touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.” Lincoln, March 4, 1861
Al Alborn is being interviewed, via phone, by CNN/KSRO Radio, at 10:48 this morning. Al and I don’t agree on everything, but we can disagree and still honor our different points of view. Vigorous debate has been at the very birth of our nation and there is no reason to stop now. But vigorous debate is not accusing the other person of not being a true American because they don’t agree with you. It isn’t about yelling the loudest so others are too afraid to participate. I believe we all love our country, we just don’t necessarily agree on how to solve our problems. I believe THOSE differences, and our ability to express them, is what makes us a Democracy.
Thank you, H-h.
I saw an interview with Annabel park somewhere the other day and I agreed with much of what she was saying – a need to move forward with more than two parties, since the two parties engage with each other more than with issues and with the people. I totally agree. The more I think about it, I want to see the two party system smashed up. I used to believe that it was what made us more effective than european nations – that neither party could afford to neglect an issue. But it’s not working at all. Time and again real issues are submerged while the two parties have us all off in fantasy-land – like this health care “debate” with no real controls on cost and no real discussion about end-of-life care costs.
I am skeptical about this Coffee Party though. At the end of the day I suspect most of the Tea Party folks will vote Republican and kost of the Cofee Party bloggers will vote Democratic.
It seems to me that the Tea Party and the Coffee Party can serve meaningful purpose as vehicles to oppose/change the status quo in the Republican and Democratic parties, respectively. But I’m not sure that either has a pointed enough agenda to do that.
I wish them both gospeed on their mission though. I hope that one or the other has a perceived effect in 2010 and 2012 elections and that one party or the other moves away from what they are now.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Rick!
If our elected public servants can start talking about solving problems and creating an environment where debate is civil and encouraged, I don’t care what side gets more votes.
Rick, I remember you being very cogent on the subject of the 2 party system a few years ago. You made me think I was wrong. I wish you could post your old feelings so we could re-examine them.
I do think you are right about the end of the day. However, if it shakes up the parties to start behaving responsibly, then it is a good thing.
Elena, I agree. But personally I’m less concerned about civility than with serving the people (as opposed to entrenched special interests).
Moon-howler, I did indeed say in the past that the two-party system was part of what has made us great. My thinking was that our government was by necessity highly reactive. Neither party could afford to let the other one get the “jump” on an issue – if one got ahead, that was that. By contrast in these European and other nations it’s all about maintaining coalitions of the elected, and there’s less need to react quickly, and things drag. here onec the two parties agree on anything, OR once the American people are 60% sure of something, it’s a done deal.
But I’ve changed my mind. Power has corrupted the two parties absolutely as far as I can tell. They are each almost entirely divorced from reality and spinning our populace further and further into fantasy land.
Everyday-Democracy.org is also applauding this movement on Facebook. They’re a resource center for community dialogue. We’ve used them for the neighborhood improvement circles in the city and county and Lynchburg has used them with their “Many Voices, One Community” community dialogues.
“No sooner has one Party discovered or invented an Amelioration
of the Condition of Man or the order of Society, than the opposite
Party belies it, misconstrues it, misrepresents it, ridicules it,
insults it, and persecutes it.”
John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, July 9, 1813.
(Rabid blogs and Foxy “news” didn’t start the problem – they just made
it worse. Good luck with the Coffee Party – every little push back to
the rational middle helps.)
It is lonely in the middle.
I must need new glasses, PR. I thought you said rabid dogs.
I have another interview scheduled for 8:35 P.M EST this afternoon, 4 March 2010 with the folks at NEWSTALK 1350 KSRO http://www.ksro.com/Programs/KSROAMNews.aspx to talk about the coffee party. If you want to listen in, go here http://player.streamtheworld.com/_players/maverick/index.php?callsign=KSROAM
Rick,
I can tell you firsthand, living with someone with opposite views, if all you do is yell and belittle you CAN’T find solutions. Without some parameter of civil discourse, you just won’t get to the best results. I dont’ mean silly sugary pretend conversation, heated/vigorous debate is great, but the yelling and name calling, that just simply is intolerable. The town hall meetings were a fiasco in my opinion.
Thanks Poor Richard, I hope it helps create an environment where people have the room to problems@Poor Richard
Poor Richard and Rick,
I hope you guys come, you are the people that truly do represent the “idea” of the coffee party, people with differing views who want to solve problems, not just bully the other person into submission. No one “knows” who you really are, come for coffee and donuts!
This does sound like a positive development. The two sides need to at least have reasonable dialog. Often times, things have been too heated on both sides for any kind of common ground to be found – no matter what the issue. One would hope politics would be about the art of compromise – but often times lately all I’ve seen is both sides standing firm with no one wanting to give any ground. This applies to a whole range of current issues – in fact I almost don’t care what issue you pick – it seems equally applicable!
We definitely don’t need any rabid animals – dogs or otherwise, MH!
I sort of think you are right – but at least some kind of constructive dialog is maybe being attempted. I also agree – the two party system we have definitely has its disadvantages as recently the two parties have become very polarized and moving somewhat to the opposite ends of the spectrum. That leaves no room for those who are somewhat aligned with one of those parties but has more moderate views. I would hope that the majority of the Americans are moderates – but it seems to me that both parties have moved more to the extremes of their positions (left or right). Others may disagree – but that’s my view of things. Any effort to sort of steer things back in a more moderate direction for both parties is welcome, in my view.
It is true, other countries don’t have a two party system. Some countries – there may be no majority party and the party with the biggest minority may then have to work to try and get other minority parties to come together and form some kind of coalition gov’t. This is how things work in Israel for instance. It’s debatable whether that works well or not. Sometimes the coalition is held together by a thread – and it has been broken and then special elections are forced, etc. etc. It is an interesting alternative though – but how such a system would work here is hard to say. Every system has its good and bad attributes – I don’t think there is any such thing as a “perfect” political party system. Politics is complicated, no matter how you try and form political parties/governments.
Agree Gainesville! There is no perfect system, hey, politics involves human beings and since we aren’t perfect………..
I wonder how Annabel squares “civil dialogue” with her recent “tweets.” I would be very open to an explanation, because this seems to show not only intolerance for opposing ideas, but also the obvious Progressive bent of this movement:
Emma, did Annabel say the above or did someone respond with that?
I don’t like the word ‘progressive’ as it is used now by TPP and GLenn Beck. Many of us who are center left have used ‘progressive’ to describe ourselves for year and years. Now someone rewinds to a century ago and all of a sudden we are socialists. I don’t think so. In fact, I react to the Beck definition of progessive like many people do to teabagger.
The Coffee Party people refer to themselves as “progressives,” so I assume they don’t find it offensive, although they throw around “teabagger” freely. The quote was a Twitter “tweet” from Annabel.
I refer to myself as a progressive and I do not mean what Glenn Beck does. I also refer to myself as a moderate independent. Progressive is a normal word that amongst moderates and left centrists means…center leaning left. I feel the term has been hi jacked.
Emma, some of the tea bagger stuff got started from tea bag people themselves. I heard it hundreds of times and saw people out dressed up with tea bags hanging off themselves. Then someone said it was offensive. I believe it is the expression, not the concept that is considered offensive. I don’t think many people knew the nasty expression. I sound very much like Bette Midler when no one is listening. I had not heard it. I know lots of filth. I had a father, brothers, sons, husband and brothers in law. No sisters. You either learned filth or died.
So where did this show up? Can you link me to it?
Emma, I am sitting back and watching the Coffee Party and helping out my friends where I can. I have enough on my plate right now and plus, I am not a joiner any longer. I have gotten the impression, judging from the people I know, that it is mainly made up of moderate mainstream folks who feel like they have been outshouted by the Glenn Becks of the world. I don’t think they feel real at home with Obama necessarily.
If I were to join, it would be to stand up to the bullies I saw this summer and fall who hi jacked any civil discourse at town hall meetings. just being honest….
Except that democracy is messy, and noisy, and sometimes people have to shout to be heard. Why should the left take out all their frustration on Americans doing what Americans are Constitutionally protected to do in order to be heard?
As I said before, if I were a Democrat, I would be furious at my party for squandering their supermajority. Conservative protestors really can’t be blamed if the Democrats themselves couldn’t unify for the good of their party when they had all the votes needed. They had it all, and they blew it. They lost out on healthcare because of the election of Scott Brown. I wonder if the Coffee Partiers blame the voters for that, or the lack of civility in political discourse, or Fox News. Is it at all possible that the American people are revolting against this administration’s agenda, and not that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the political process? Reading through the Coffee Party Facebook fan postings, I’m getting more of a sense of sore loser/sour grapes syndrome than any real interest in productive dialogue.
And if you did stand up to the bullies as you say, that certainly would be your right to try to shout them down. I fully support that, too.
Has anyone ever watched the British Parliament. Talk about noisy and messy! I’ve seen it on TV a few times and it is really quite amazing to watch, and even more amazing they get anything accomplished in there!
Not that I’m saying I want to see our Congress start behaving like that. They behave poorly enough as it is…
I also can see the Tea Party at one end of the spectrum, and the Coffee Party ending up sort of at the other end. I might be wrong about that – but I could see that sort of happening. Anytime something forms as an alternative to something else – it tends to become kind of the opposite of it. That’s sort of how our two party system formed.
Did anyone see American Experience the other night about Dolly Madison? it seems that in our early period, Congressmen hated each other so much that there was a duel a day in Bladensburg?
Sounds somewhat familiar today in a figurative way.
By the way, I don’t like to drink either tea or coffee so I am left out. Anyone want to join my Cola Party? The one with no redeeming value?
@Emma
You know, I have to agree that there’s a lot of interesting stuff being thrown around by Coffee Party folks. Since this group doesn’t require applications, anyone can play. I think I mentioned before that I find the team “Tea B****r” offensive; however, so many tea party folks use it (and so many other folks aren’t familiar with it’s “urban definition”) that I tend to ignore them (although whenever I get the chance, I protest). The tea party needs to police its own crowd to avoid the term or it will (perhaps has) become their “brand”.
I agree that we need to yo re-engage the grassroots movement that got Obama elected. That isn’t necessarily a statement supporting Obama; however, it is a statement about re-energizing the folks who want change in Government. In the broader context, (IMHO) it also describes Tea Party members who are unhappy with Government. The grassroots concept works both ways. I’m one of the many who voted for bush and was disillusioned by the defect, the war (Iraq, I support Afghanistan), eight years of an emphasis on “letting the financial market” take care of itself, etc. I both donated money and voted for him. Considering his support in Virginia, I’m not the only middle of the road Independent who put him in office. There just aren’t enough “Progressives” to do that without us. The validation of my thesis is McDonnell’s win of the Governor’s mansion.
And, like a lot of Independent’s, I’m disappointed with what Obama has done with a Majority in the House and the Senate. He just doesn’t have the skills of Lyndon Johnson when it comes to “horse trading” for legislation. I will also admit that I believe a lot of Americans are still unhappy that we elected an African American president. I believe the Southern Poverty Law Center has reported membership in such groups has “skyrocketed”. That’s a bad comment on where we are as a society.
You know, the Coffee Party and the Tea Party both are unhappy with Government. As Lamar Alexander demonstrated in his opening comments during the Health Care Summit, there are some things we agree on. I hope we can come together and work on advancing what we have in common instead on focusing on what we don’t. We can get to that stuff later.
Emma,
Democracy is messy, has been, and will always be, the level of hysteria surrounding Obama though has been unreasonable and I do NOT believe representative of most people in the middle. The TEA party was out demonstrating about the demise of American two months after Obama was elected. Geez, at least give the guy a chance. Even Bush, having defeated Gore via the supreme court did not suffer this kind of push back. I would not fall on my sword over a public option, I think there are other ways to compromise and clearly, given the fact that it is now out of BOTH the house and senate version, I am wondering what will it take for the Republicans to compromise? I worry when I see information from the RNC regarding their strategy to simply block everything Democrats push so that the government fails, creating a situation where we ALL lose. I actually don’t believe that having the majority and creating such a huge policy change is good when only one party can support it. I am not comfortable with that as a way to create the best legislation. I enjoyed the health care summit, I like learning about policy and how people believe their ideas are the best. I like informed educated healthy vigorous debate. What I don’t like is what I have seen, overwhelming, coming from the TEA party rallies, the rhetoric etc.
And if I were a Republican I would be furious at those who were out there at town hall meetings shouting and screaming at people and acting like ignorant rednecks. Those people are not associated with the Democratics. Additionally, where were they during the past 8 years? Doesn’t that make anyone suspicious.
It is transparent to me what is going on.
Now, back to disliking both political parties.
We really need to restore a tolerant and civil society. Compromise isn’t made shouting in picket lines, it’s made talking at tables… and it is open to at least the possibility of compromise. Those familiar with the creation of the Constitution (particularly the Bill of Rights) are aware this document represented the ultimate compromise… and that was the key to the grand experiment that we are all still a part of. Shouldn’t we follow the founding father’s example?
Probably not @Al. We would be dueling.
I want to form a Urine Party … motto will be “let’s p*ss all over th two parties”.
“The town hall meetings were a fiasco in my opinion.” I see your point. Though I personally enjoy the spectacle of our representatives getting shouted at. Because, they do deserve it.
“it seems to me that both parties have moved more to the extremes of their positions (left or right)” – I do disagree with that. I think the problem is that on too many of the REAL issues – not the phony ones they distract us with – the two parties bunch up in the same place based on what their lobbyist bosses tell them to do – bail out Wall Street, continually subsidize unchecked growth, continually subsidize every aspect of big business even at the detriment of Americans.
@Elena
I am sorry but let’s not have revisionist history. Bush was criticized immensely for an economy that was tanking at the end of the previous administration, after the collapse of the house of cards dot.com era, and was blamed for its demise right after he was elected. that was within months of his election and what could he have done to have caused it?
It happens all the time in American politics but the democrats were not without their own share of blaming a newcomer.
And we can take it all back to what happened to Clinton before he even took office. I don’t ever recall seeing anything as nasty as that.
Where does a person fit into the grand scheme of things if she blames neither Bush or Obama for our current economic woes? They were a long time in the making.
“We’re in mortal danger of going backwards in Nov. Get some coffee, get off of your butt & rejoin the movement for change.”
“We all know what we have to do. Did it last year. Must do it this year. We must focus. Bec we want change.”
“we must volunteer. we must vote. we must continue our march towards change and hope.”
http://twitter.com/annabelpark
“we worked our butts off to get ya’ll elected. get the job done! hell hath no fury like a voter scorned”
“just get the job done! we r fed up & we will vote in nov. not just the tea baggers.”
“We are the movement that got Obama elected. We did it to change the country that we love. Not for the love of 1 man.”
“we must deal with reality instead of indulging the paranoid fantasies of the #teaparty.”
“we need to re-engage the grassroots movement that got obama elected. we need to get busy. cannot give it away to tea baggers.”
I really started getting taken in by the civil, inclusive and party-neutral ideals of the Coffee Party. But then I looked at the founder’s very recent “tweets.”
Wow.
@Emma
Thanks for posting the twitter feed. I pretty much agree with that (but wish she and others would stay away from the term “tea ba****s”. I even find myself “slipping because Tea Party folks tend to use it… confusing whether it’s a “good thing or a bad thing”. I’ve also noticed that mainstream media has picked it up… so I guess it’s going to stick.
I will lever be comfortable with the term… no reason to insult people we disagree with… however it doesn’t appear to be an insult anymore… it appears to be the Tea Party’s new “brand”.
Seen the Secret Republican PowerPoint fundraising presentation where Democrats are the “Evil Empire”, Obama’s the Joker, Pelosi is Curella Deville, and Reid is Scooby Doo? If that’s the Republican’s National Strategy, I’m really glad I’m an Independant so I may “vote” my opinion.
@Rick Bentley
I also agree that sometimes our representatives deserve a good shouting. The most civil town hall meetings were the ones where the reps engaged the people without obfuscation. People tend to get loud when they think they’re being lied to.
One person. What difference does one person make? One person isn’t a movement. Which make you more uncomfortable, Annabel’s tweets or some clown saying that Obama wasn’t born in the USA?
I think it stand to reason that people who voted for Obama might be disappointed in the way things are turning out. If they weren’t, would the coffee party even started?
You cannot have it both ways. Look at the collection of TPP remarks and look at the collection of Coffee Party people (CPP). Where do you feel more comfortable? Look at who is leading the CPP in this area. Al Alborn. Does he make you uncomfortable?
@Al I’m not so much highlighting the “teabagger” comments but more so the obvious political alignment of the movement and the derision towards what Annabel clearly feels is the opposition to that movement.
I’m not a Tea Party person by a long shot, but I have no interest in joining the “Anti-Tea-Party-Pro-Obama” movement. Too bad; I actually thought there was hope for something real there.
Al, I have ‘slipped’ many times on the ‘tea bagger’ expression. I have stopped worrying about it. almost everything most of them say is insulting towards me and my beliefs. To me, tea bags are things I put in a cup of hot water to make my tea. I will let them deal with their own demons that evolved out of their name Tea Party name. If they were worried about it, thousands wouldn’t have pranced around at rallies on TV with tea bags hanging off hats etc. Sorry, the image stuck.
If I try not to say things that offend people but I am not going to go through heroics here. It isn’t worth it to me to walk on egg shells so people who call me a communist won’t be offended.
@Moon-howler No, Al does not make me at all uncomfortable. I enjoy his comment threads very much. But in his reasonable-ness, he stands out as not really being representative of what I am seeing the Coffee Party is all about, and what its own founder feels that it stands for.
@Emma
Thank you, Emma. I feel the same way about your comments. I wish you would join us. We don’t have to know you are “Emma”. We need to figure out how to get people of good will who might disagree on some things to focus on the things we agree about to advance the process of Government.
You know, this stopped being Annabel’s movement a long time ago. It’s just too big. It will actually be (IMHO) a lot of loosely aligned, relatively autonomous groups (like the Prince William County Group) consisting of people looking for a place to engage in a civil dialog. She gets full credit for starting it and will probably remain a very visible part of our brand; however, I expect new leadership to emerge from its ranks. In business, we know that the person who starts a business isn’t necessarily the right person to run that business as it grows (if the “owner” wants that business to succeed). I don’t know where it will go; however, I would like to influence the end state so that it focuses on improving the process of Government vice detracting from other groups (particularly groups like the Tea Party members who fundamentally have the same goal).
Perhaps disaffected members from both groups will form a third group? The Synergists?
I hope you’re in the croud Saturday… I don’t have to know you’re “Emma”. You have a lot to offer.
Emma, that’s fair and I can’t dispute anything you have said because I haven’t followed the tweetings or anything being said on that website. I have only worked with Al and Elena on Coffee Party who I know are reasonable.
I sort of have my hands full here and as I said, I am not really a joiner at this point. I do support role better. However, I am always up for coffee ……early and often.
If the Coffee Party doesn’t turn out to be what I hope it will become, I will gracefully retire back to a quiet role as an Independent voter. Of course, first I will try to make it what I would like to see it become… a tool to restore a tolerant and civil society.
In business, you don’t give your “competition” free publicity. It’s both a business mistake and a public relations mistake to constantly bash the Tea Party. Those folks are loyal, patriotic Americans (just like “us”) who also what to “fix” Government.
Folks, the problem is that “change” is such a ill defined term. Change merely means that the status quo is different but it has no qualifiers. “Change for the better” sounds like a qualified term but in reality it doesn’t show the starting point or the expectation.
So you have two groups that are saying, “this is not the change I voted for”. Well, it isn’t because in the absence of a qualifier you put in your own qualifier. Gays are just as unhappy with the pace of their change as a conservative is with the desire that spending be reined in. Clinton for all of his personal faults oversaw a solid economy and I will venture to say that people that voted for “change” thought that the President would be the second coming of Clinton in the economic sense. Especially after the republican led congress walked away from its values to engage in large spending.
So you have two groups clamoring that this is not change that “we wanted”. It doesn’t mean that there is any common ground between them. Unless the organizations adopt a similar value system, they will be overtaken by fringe elements, because fringe elements yell the loudest and get the most attention.
The value system I would propose is the return to true civility and compromise. It would start with looking at what everyone wants in the end result and negotiate the means to get there. As I have said before on this blog, if you have a group in complete control and others opposing it have no voice, then it usually results in bad decisions.
There is no question that democracy is a terribly inefficient form of government. It takes time to make a decision because at is core, it requires discussion. Absolute monarchy or dictatorship requires no discussion as it goes with the whim of the leader. Decisions are made quickly and implemented immediately. Although I am in no way suggesting that we have a dictatorship in this country composed of one political party, but there are some similarities in that discussion and compromise are sometimes neither done nor encouraged–especially if you hold all of the cards. Usually when you have bills before congress that are different, they need to be reconciled through a conference committee. The committee is formed by members of both political party. So, why has there been no committee formed to reconcile the bills? Because they don’t want to involve the other party (and if the republicans were in the majority, I am sure it would be the same.)
Sorry for the longish post.
Once again, Al makes a lot of sense. I would think that the Pr Wm area coffee party could be anything it wants to be. Those who come out initially will be the definers, it would seem to me.
“Those who come out initially will be the definers, it would seem to me.”
Good point.
Rez, a couple of reflections on what you said…..
People who identify with the TP movement probably didn’t vote for Obama. Were they even clamoring for change before the election? I don’t remember that as a part of Republican sloganeering. It was more of a turn back the hands of time to our way as I recall. (which might not be totally accurate)
Secondly, as a person who did end up voting for Obama, who I admit was not my first choice in all this, I sure didn’t expect to get the second coming of Clinton and neither did anyone else. Many of us voted for Hillary to get a second round of Bill. I do not deny that. I could care less who he does in the oval office. That is between him and Hillary.
Unfortunately, that is not the way it all came down. Fast rewind back to the 2004 Democratic convention….no one should have been surprised. I actually called it and didnt realize it.
Palin and the Democrat primaries sort of catapulted things forward and here we are. That does not mean I wish ill for Obama, he just wasn’t my first choice.
@Al I will take your word on that and keep my mind open. “Emma Woodhouse” might even make a comment or two on Facebook if she doesn’t get her ladylike 19th-century, Romantic-era head bitten off for her opinions, and see where things go.