Disqus - Latest Comments for bonniekuzminski

Re: NW Indiana Patriots - Tea Party respond

bonniekuzminski — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:19:42 -0000

Oscar Zoroaster, You're not questioning our intentions, only our strategy and tactics? Do you not read your own posts? To refresh your memory, you wonder, referring to NWIP, "What exactly are they hoping to prove?" by attending a GOP meeting. Reference our post for a reply.

You question our understanding of our own Mission Statement by voicing your disapproval of the (imagined) effect of our actions on the national Tea Party movement, based on our choice of issues to address. Is this an attempt to pre-emptively blame NWIP for the passage of national health care reform, or do you call this showing a kindly-meant concern for the effects of our political naivete, which we are too moronic to understand, in the friendly confines of your imagination? I call it an abysmal ignorance of what is going on nationally in the Tea Party movement. Show me the evidence to back up your assertion, the one you find "needless to say," but say anyway.

Or do you make the unwarranted assumption that if something is important to you, it must be of equal importance to all right-thinking people? And if you deem something beneath your notice, like a local tax increase, does it follow, in your imaginary kingdom, that no one else should pay it any mind? Perhaps I'm mistaking ignorance for a grossly-inflated ego. More likely it's both.

I had thought our reply made clear the reasons for our tactics and strategy. That is your concern, you claim. Reference the post:

"We are on the street every single day informing our fellow citizens about the referendum on November 3, and people are responding. Some go in and vote right then and there. Others take signs and inform others. This is what's called grassroots activism, Mr. Z..."

Perhaps that leaves too much to your imagination, so I will connect the dots for you and address your disapproval of the numbers on our Meetup site as simply as I can. Numbers on a website don't tell the whole story of the effect of a program to get information out to people. Refer to the above for an explanation of how we are accomplishing that.

Your comments indicate you still don't understand what NWIPs is about and persist in clinging bitterly to your fantasy that NWIP's purpose is to help established political parties or political operators gain and retain power in approved (by you) fashion. You seem unable to conceive of any other legitimate reason for our existence than to assist one particular stripe of politician. That's passing strange, for someone who follows our activities so obsessively.

I don't take advice from people whose opinions I don't respect--and I don't accept counsel from people who claim concern by leveling insults and name-calling while hiding behind a pseudonym. If you know as much as you declare about the people who support the goals of the Tea Party movement, then you will know why I say that. The people I've come to know since my involvement in NWIP respect people who have the courage of their convictions and who are willing to own their own words. I see no evidence of either from you.

Your comment above ends with a whine about how I'm ignoring your "advise" -- oh, did you mean advice? Why would any self-respecting person want it? Your original post and comments here reek of condescension, snobbery, a desperately-clung-to sense of superiority and dishonesty. The guise of concern for NWIP you affect doesn't cover the stench. You're a fraud, sir/madam, just like the fictional character whose name you chose to hide behind turned out to be.

Re: Tea Party Attendence Dies as NWIPs Focus on RTA

bonniekuzminski — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:42:44 -0000

Mr. Dalton: Thank you for the lesson--now one for you. Beware the tendency to conflate blanket acceptance or condemnation with honest questioning about principles. I have no difficulty with differences on issues. What I have a problem with is the refusal to own a philosophical point of view. What you call applying a litmus test, I call evaluating a person's principles in order to make an intelligent decision about whether to agree with or, in the case of a political candidate or issue, support him, her or it.

You say, "See how complex conservatism can be when one litmus test is propounded as the "only" true and right position?" But identity groups don't have views--people do. The term "conservatism" is not interchangable with "people with conservative views," as you yourself point out. Conservatives and their views come in many flavors. The devil is in the details, so how do you decide which person or position you agree with and support? I don't evaluate conservatism when I ask what a conservative thinks and why he thinks it--I evaluate what that person says. Are you saying, don't make judgments about people or political views based on your own principles? Do you follow your own advice? In answer to your question, I would say, yes, making decisions among many options is complex, but you would have me throw away the only tools I have to make sense of them and come to informed conclusions: my assessments of the facts of policies or positions and what principles underpin them, to determine their fit with my own views. Not going to happen.

You go on to talk of the problems of governing: "then even more complex is explaining that right balance to citizens who are tired of being fooled and defrauded by their elected officials." Following your advice would mean the solution to that problem is that people abandon their judgment of issues--excuse me, refrain from applying litmus tests--as you cautioned me to do. One consequence of doing it your way--how will citizens be able to evaluate what the right balance is? They won't be able to, of course. True, it would make politicians' lives easier. But that's not most peoples' mission in life. Perhaps electing politicians who have principles and live by them would eventually solve that problem. But that would require voters to assess character by questioning principles, that pesky litmus testing again. It's everywhere in a free society.

You say, "Don't shame your party, perhaps shame on the group that is using you right now to do their dirty work." Don't worry, Mr. Dalton, I won't shame the Republican Party--it got far beyond that point all by itself. This is the second time you've referenced a nefarious plot behind opposing the RTA referendum. What is it, who is behind it, and what do they have to gain? I want to know of whom and what I am a victim.

Re: Tea Party Attendence Dies as NWIPs Focus on RTA

bonniekuzminski — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:08:00 -0000

First we're morons, now we're dupes. Apparently the art of persuasion goes down the drain when the subject is expanding government power, increasing government spending and raising taxes.

Sir, we're not interested in a history of Porter County Republicanism--we're interested in its future. I attended the meeting in Kouts last night, and came away unimpressed with the party's vision for it--in fact, we were informed that the GOP has no official position on the RTA referendum, that there is a lot of misinformation out there, and we should research it for ourselves. We were assured that many Republicans are against the increase in taxes, on an individual basis, as you note. They are up to speed on their fundraisers, though.

We have researched it for ourselves and found that taxes will indeed go up if the RTA board is created. We were told that wouldn't happen for several years. That is irrelevant--taxes will go up if it is passed. There has not been the taxing authority created that hasn't used its power, and this one will be no different.

You urge us to continue the fight-- to "Support the leaders that are willing to try new things, to privatize, to create jobs with private industry and investment, to work with faith based organizations, to collaborate where so many have taken mediocrity as an easy way out." Fine words. How about applying them to the projects of the RDA? How about thinking outside the government-is-the-solution box in that regard? But, but, but---we can get Federal and State money if we band together, I've heard. No--we are getting our own money back after those middlemen take their cut. Part of every dollar every business pays in goverment fees, taxes and whatever other officially-sanctioned methods of extraction are used is paid by consumers of those businesses' products. And that doesn't include every penny we pay to DC and Indianapolis in personal income tax. Federal and State funds aren't bounty--they're refunds.

Why doesn't the Porter County Republican party make the consequences of the RTA referendum, higher income taxes, clear to the public? Why doesn't it point out the fact that it will add another layer of unaccountable bureaucracy on the taxpayer's back? Have you all grown so comfortable with the notion that government is the answer? Shame on you. You deserve to lose the support of freedom-minded people, as you have.

By the way, your description of the poster's choice of pseudonym, "irony," gives him or her too much credit. "Cowardice" would be a better fit.

Re: Tea Party Attendence Dies as NWIPs Focus on RTA

bonniekuzminski — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:44:38 -0000

Northwest Indiana Patriots response is here. http://nwipatriots.com/blog...