******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Coffee Party Parasites

The New York Times and Washington Post are promoting a group called the "Coffee Party" organized by filmmaker Annabel Park.

The Coffee Party is a political parasite which presents itself as something it is not. As reported in the NY Times [see update below], Park presents herself as not hostile to the Tea Party movement, and in fact, hopes to bring some Tea Partiers into her group:
“We’re not the opposite of the Tea Party,” Ms. Park, 41, said. “We’re a different model of civic participation, but in the end we may want some of the same things.” ....

Ms. Park and chapter organizers said they would invite Tea Party members to join their Coffee counterparts in discussions. “We need to roll up our sleeves, put our heads together and work it out,” she said. “That’s, to me, an American way of doing this.”
In fact, a simple internet search (which the NY Times apparently is not capable of doing) reveals that Park organized the Coffee Party for the specific purpose of undermining the Tea Party movement.

Park is a former Strategy Analyst [Park's Linked In page has been taken down, here is a cached link] at the NY Times who was one of organizers and operators of the United for Obama video channel at YouTube:
A Korean-American filmmaker is in charge of creating video clips that are playing a role in increasing support for Senator Barack Obama, the frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

"I found that people have little understanding of the change that Senator Barack Obama is advocating. I thought from my experience in using videos for civil movements that videos would be the best way to promote the need for change and for Obama. That's why I decided to work for the Obama campaign," Annabel Park said.

Joining the contest in December last year as chief of a promotional video team, Park has produced some 20 five-minute video clips which have generated a positive response. A clip interviewing actress Kelly Hu in support of the senator was viewed some 10,000 times, and a music video called "Oh Bama" [embed below, Park appears at 1:35]] drew wide attention. She has also produced Spanish-language videos to draw support from Hispanics.

The 40-year-old Park is leading an Obama promotional section on video-sharing site YouTube (www.youtube.com/unitedforobama) with around 10 other volunteers.


Park's Twitter history leaves no doubt as to her hatred of the Tea Party movement, and the formation of the Coffee Party as a counterweight:




















































It is very clear from Park's background, and her own Tweets, that the Coffee Party simply is part of the perpetual Obama campaign, a means by which to subvert the real grassroots Tea Party movement by co-opting part of the message, but in a way which supports keeping Obama in power.

Much like a parasite which feeds off of and ultimately takes over the host.

Update: Interesting, I received a phone call from Kate Zernike, the author of the NY Times article, who felt that I did not sufficiently credit her article with disclosing Park's background and motives. Specificially, Zernike pointed out that the Times' article said the Coffee Party "was formed in reaction to the Tea Party" and offered "an alternative" to the Tea Party. Zernike also felt that the pro-Obama nature of the Coffee Party was adequately disclosed because the article pointed out that one of the organizers in California (not Park) had campaigned for Obama.

I explained that I did not feel that the NY Times article adequately disclosed (i) the depth of the connection to the Obama campaign reflected in Park's background, or (ii) that the specific purpose of the Coffee Party, as expressed in Park's Tweets, was to undermine the Tea Party.

I told Ms. Zernike that I would do an update to this post, and I hoped that she would do an update to her article to explain Park's Obama connection and apparent motivations. Ms. Zernike declined, explaining that she had to limit her article to 700 words.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Inevitable "Tea Party" and "Amy Bishop" Link Attempt
Tea Parties Are Sooo Scaaary
Looking At Tea Parties Through Binoculars, Like On Safari
Liberal Doughboys Afraid of Tea Parties

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
Bookmark and Share

84 comments:

  1. I am going to go out on a limb and predict that the Coffee Party ship never leaves port. Who are they kidding? If ever there was a wolf in sheep's clothing, this is it. Not even clever or imaginative. Sheep don't growl.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow. The NYT and Washington Post, for some inexplicable reason, did not mention anything about this in any of their fawning coverage of this Obamacrat astroturf fake "grassroots" group.

    That really is surprising, because they're usually very even-handed when covering protest movements that aren't leftwing protest movements.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I ran into this group on facebook a few days ago. They have about 50,000 fans of their page. Comments on the page are the same worn out rhetoric that the tea party is full of racists, haters, etc. I suppose just your average huffpo reader. Will it go anywhere? Time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "I found that people have little understanding of the change that Senator Barack Obama is advocating."

    WRONG!

    We know EXACTLY what he is advocating, and DO NOT WANT!

    Wake up and smell the tea!

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is actually amusing. I predict that she and the rest of this TRUE 'ASTROTURF' movement will fade away just as spectacularly as they came about. This is nothing more than giving folks that already vote democratic another name.

    The Teaparty Patriots were so successful because they managed to engage and fire up, citizens that had never before been interested in politics. This chick can scream change! change! change! all she wants, the American people have already spoken and they don't want your "change".

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks for doing the research, as you helped make my point that I made earlier today; I've cross-posted at GOP Counterculture:
    http://gopcounterculture.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/what-is-the-tea-party/

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry, phil, I have to disagree.

    This is a sheep in sheep's clothing.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wait, your argument is that because someone who was ALREADY politically-involved somehow negates something as being grassroots?? Ridiculous. Tea Party backing from Fox News machine and Dick Armey's money is the anti-thesis of grassroots. Your argument is a ridiculous stretch. There is no seeeeekret hidden agenda, it is spelled out the party was formed in response to the Tea Party in order to present other views. Your dismissive tone is EXACTLY the problem with political discourse today.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Funny how someone advocating for civil discourse and dialogue among all parties is so hated here. Pity, I am not a coffee party member, but am a student of history, public policy, and the Constitution, and what this is offering is something I do not see in the Tea Party movement, despite a 3 our conversation with one of their leaders: a willingness to sit down and talk about issues and trying to find some solutions other than over throwing the duly elected government of this nation or economic policies that got us into this mess in the first place.

    Ms. Park's Tweets may be over the top for some here because she campaigned for Obama, but when viewed objectively, it seems she is trying to stand up for civil discourse and discussion outside of DC to try to find solutions, and she is extorting her fellow progressives to stop sitting at home watching TV and to get up and get active again in our democracy. Isn't that similar to what the Tea Party movement founders wanted from the conservative base? Why is it wrong for progressives to try to do the same for their base? Seems a little hypocritical to me.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Based on my observations, the average Tea Party member likes to rail against government and taxes while happily collecting their Social Security and Medicare checks.

    Do you guys really want to have a discussion about who the parasites are?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh no! Someone's trying to mess up the corporate puppet show that's the "Tea Party Movement!" We must rise to the defense of insurance company lobbyists or they won't be able to keep screwing us over, like the founders intended!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Here's a related YouTube video parody: Coffee Party Smells More Like Kool-Aid: http://www.youtube.com/user/Optoons#p/u/1/DBOJrlKyfIE

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lazarus, I have no idea what you mean by your comment.

    The Coffee Party is an artificial construct pretending to be a grassroots organization trying to piggy back on the Tea Party's success in an attempt to fragment, derail or otherwise weaken the movement.

    DOA. We just aren't that dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Great work again, Mr. Jacobson.

    Nancy Pelosi was interviewed on a Sunday talk show saying the Tea Partiers actually have alot in common with the Democrats. Of course, last spring she labled the Town Hall protesters, many of whom I assume are Tea Parties, as Nazis, angry mob, etc. So whatever.

    Now WaPo and the NYT are promoting the Coffee Party, a (fake) movement almost nobody knew existed a month ago. In addition, the NYT recently penned a scathing 4200 word expose highlighting the most extreme fringe elements of the Tea Party.

    If I were a cynic, I could connect a bunch of dots to conclude the Democratic Party leadership, the MSM, and professional astroturfers have conspired to map out a November campaign strategy that appears to be well underway.

    Or maybe the Pelosi interivew, formation of the Coffee Party, it's promotion in the MSM, and recent denouncement of the Tea Party in the MSM all happened spontaneously, purely by chance, over about a 4 week period.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The large portion of the leadership of the Coffee Party are filmographers: Annabel and her partner Eric Byler put together UnitedforObama on youtube as you outlined.

    Here's more in the lineup:
    Amyn Kaderali - filmographer and star of both UnitedforObama and CoffeeParty videos.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVwVlvVYlwk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1v2aG-QMls


    Then there's Eileen Cabiling, leader of the LA chapter of Coffee Party, according to NYT. She's a filmographer, aka Eileen Ong Ante Cabiling.

    And then there's the film of the Atlanta Coffee Party, filmed by Tim Avirett. Could this be the same Tim Avirett that was on the camera crew for Michael Moore's TV Nation?
    http://www.facebook.com/#!/posted.php?id=314393744066&share_id=368205745119&comments=1#s368205745119
    http://www.fancast.com/people/Tim-Avirett/1177185/projects?&num=30&page=1


    Too early to tell whether these folks are hired help, flying solo, or part of the NEA propaganda effort.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Smells like the overwhelmingly popular Air America!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Annabel says we shouldn;t go backwards.

    I want to point out that progressiveness is going backwards:

    truth and deception feel the same.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Most of the comments want to negate the coffee party. What could be wrong about civil discourse? As one person has commented: "Your dismissive tone is EXACTLY the problem with political discourse today." Just because someone worked for Obama doesn't negate the central idea of working together to make our elected officials accountable. Or are some people afraid that by talking, something will come out that puts their party in a bad light?

    ReplyDelete
  19. This strikes me as little more than a construct to enable the media to have a Tea Party counterweight. It isn't as though this will be teamed with anything but the usual suspects. That being insular leftists who can't communicate with normal Americans without media obfuscation because they are wedded to an alternate America. We no longer have a common culture as between postmodernism and an effort to politicize every last lifestyle choice these people have become estranged - by their own choice - from everyone else. Their emptiness is at its most palpable when they go about the arrogant work of telling everyone else what they need.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Work for change? I think we got that already and most folks don't like it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Gee, from some of the comments here, there seems to be a lot of people who are intimidated by Americans protesting the government while holding pocket copies of the U.S. Constitution in their hands.

    And let's not forget the talking points like how Fox News backed the Tea Parties (they did not back them but reported on them while the lame stream media refused to do so) and how Dick Armey is behind it all with some nefarious intent (he is not). And then we have, of course, another standard talking point ("I talked to a guy who was a leader of the Tea Party) which is just so much manure.

    What do you want to bet that Ms. Annabel Park is a full fledged member of Obama's Organizing For America, which morphed from Obama's Organizing for Obama web site.

    Let's also not forget that the Coffee Party could be held up as a prime example of "astroturfing". Quick, someone call Nancy Pelosi. And let's not forget who became very wealth by using, and perfecting, astroturfing, David Axelrod.

    This "Coffee Party" sounds like a brain child of Axelrod, and while we are at it, let's not forget that Organizing for America was trying to recruite people to work for it and get out Obama's word and even went to far as to list those positions on CraigsList.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Park is a former Strategy Analyst at the NY Times who was one of [the] organizers and operators of the United for Obama video channel at YouTube"

    Once again, the NYT does not disclose the glaring conflict of interest. Promoting one of their own, in more ways than one!

    This "new group" will get the usual suspects to "follow," and will continue to get MSM coverage (like Cindy Sheehan), no matter how tiny the protest turnout. Business as usual. Alinsky tactics in action.

    But - we've figured them out. It won't work.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Annabel Park and Eric Byler are likely members of Orgazining for America. I'm guessing they are:
    "Annabel from Silver Spring, MD" and
    "Eric from Silver Spring, MD"

    ReplyDelete
  24. Apparently her only private sector work has been with the New York Times:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/94877/

    Go figure.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Been spending some time on their Facebook page, it's pretty ridiculous. About a third of the posts are people posting Democrat talking points, a third are people bashing the "Tea Baggers" for being racists/facists/KKK, etc. while calling for a return to civil discourse (without any sense of irony), and the final third are people posting self-congratulatory slogans about how pure and reasonable and noble they are.

    It's pretty sickening. There was a woman (Kathleen something, I think) in the beginning, calling people out on the blatant hypocrisy and lies, and doing a pretty good job of it, but she seems to have given up.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'm wondering which "leader" it was that couldn't share any concrete ideas with Devon during a 3 hour conversation. The smart money is betting that it's the cartoon redneck that lives in Devon's head.

    ReplyDelete
  27. After falling for the slick media manipulations in the last election by Obama's minions, I am extremely wary of any "grassroots" campaign organized by them. I already feel duped by President Hopenchange. Won't get fooled again.

    ReplyDelete
  28. The Coffee Party will only last b/c the MSM will keep it on life support and drag it out as a convenient counterpoint to Tea Party successes. Based on the 2 videos I've seen on YouTube, Coffee Party won't garner much real grassroots support b/c they are boring, wrong, boring, disingenuous, and oh yeah, boring.

    ReplyDelete
  29. >What could be wrong about civil discourse?

    Nice straw man, but nobody's expressed an opposition to civil discourse.

    What's being pointed out here is the founder's ties to the NYT and to the ongoing Obama perma-campaign. This girl was framed as "neutral" and wanting to get Tea Partiers to join her.

    And yet, she's campaigning for and advocating for the exact entity the tea party formed to protest. That is, the Obamacrat-dominated government. She's for the status quo, not against it.

    She's an opponent to change.

    Read the post again.

    ReplyDelete
  30. devon noll says

    " willingness to sit down and talk about issues and trying to find some solutions other than over throwing the duly elected government of this nation"

    Racy stuff, devon...and not a bad idea.

    This suggestion of yours to sit down and talk with the left about solutions? No. I don't think so. It is too far gone for that.

    The right and the left in America are like the Palestinians and the Jews...the problems will never be worked out, in fact it is impossible without some major changes in limiting government power.

    Just like the jews and pali's, the artificial stalemate needs to end.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I'm so ashamed to see nutcase liberal bitch like Anna gives Korean Americans bad reputation. Most Asians are Republicans and yes there are oddball crazy bitch like Anna.

    Heard that she tried to get a job in LA in Koreatown and you can guess what happened - people already in the politics asked who the hell is this clueless idiot from east coast trying to infiltrate the local Korean politics?

    And lastly, who is providing the financial support? Hey Anna - who are your sugar daddies?

    ReplyDelete
  32. I completely believe that the coffee party is all about "civil discourse." It must be that the only reason the organizer and a large portion of its followers keep calling people "tea baggers" is because Olbermann, Maddow, Shultz, Schuster, and other anchors from the MSNBC Peacock network have suckered innocent people into believing this is a legitimate thing to call us.

    I for one am willing to forgive the 'cock's suckers for their ignorance and move forward with EXACTLY the same level of civil discourse that the 'cock's suckers have intended to show us.

    ReplyDelete
  33. another AstroTurf campaign by the Latte Liberals. Coffee party is an apt name, though, as that's where most of the Obots go to get their wackjob ideas...well, there and a dorm room filled with a bunch of stoned college students thinking they're coming up with new ideas whenever one of them states that "health care should be free, man."

    ReplyDelete
  34. Kate Zernicke, and I'm trying to be nice here, is as neutral as a home town ref. She's the same twit who accused a CPAC speaker, Jason Mattera, of being racist because he "imitated Chris Rock," Ms. Zernicke being apparently unable to differentiate between a black guy who grew up in Brooklyn from a Hispanic who gew up in Brooklyn.

    The bias oozes out of this reporter.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Deception and unethical behavior in politics and political activism?

    Gee! Who'd a thunk it?

    ReplyDelete
  36. I saw something on their website which stated: "we are anti-Tea Party (blah blah blah)". I don't know if that statement still exists because I will not give credence to them by increasing their website hits. I'm sure they have plenty without me, anyway. A "grass roots" movement that began with it's goal of limiting the impact of another grass roots org? That's pretty pathetic: the TP has no leaders, most of the TP people dislike the Republicans as much as they dislike Democrats, and as far as corporate support goes? Where is MY money (did I sound like a liberal??)?
    This has Carville, Clinton, and Axelrod written all over it.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I recently posted a piece on Plumwood Road about the Coffee Party. I offered none of Prof. Jacobson's investigative depth, but did conclude with a prediction that readers might find interesting -- and right in line with facts we are already learning.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Jeff wrote:

    "Based on my observations, the average Tea Party member likes to rail against government and taxes while happily collecting their Social Security and Medicare checks."

    Translation:

    "Please take my money from me by threat of force, because I am an idiot who thinks accepting back any portion of my own money would make me a hipokrit.. darn that's a tough word.. wish I had a CLUE what it meant."

    Jeff wrote:

    "Do you guys really want to have a discussion about who the parasites are?"

    You can't be a parasite on yourself genius.
    The only people "happy" about collecting social security and medicare are people who are getting more out of it than they put into it, i.e. chronic welfare cases dependent upon the nanny state from cradle to grave. Kinda conflicts with that whole "less government" stance now doesn't it?
    On the other hand; to happily believe that the Federal bureaucracies, with a one-size-fits-all mentality, will invest your money for your future better than you could, would be an outright admission of your stupidity.

    So which is it? Are you a parasite greedy for your unfair share of the ponzi scheme? Or just too stupid to want to be in charge of your own finances?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Oh Professor, it looks like the Seminar people have showed up. Wait let me guess. You guys got your orders from Organizing for Obama didn't you? It's transparent now. We know what the deal is and it's pathetic.

    And Captain Obvious I think I'm in love with you now.

    And for the rest, there is nothing to talk about. This is an issue of overbearing government mommy vs my ability to make my own decisions.

    You as an individual have choices to make: education, career, house, car, kids, etc. And whatever choices you make have consequences. In a fair world, you should have to live with those consequences. That is not to say we can't have compassion/sympathy for those who are temporarily down on their luck or who honestly cannot take care of themselves. However, I refuse to become Europe. I refuse to have a society in which I am forced to pay not just for my living and for those who honestly need help, but also for those who are too darn lazy. This is why Europe’s economy has remained stagnant for decades. If you are capable of working and earning a living, I will not pay for your college education, I will not pay for your heath care, I will not pay for your children, I will not pay for your house (mortgage re-modification) and I will not pay for your car (cash for clunkers). I refuse to allow you and the rest of the phony "Can't We All Just Get along Crew" to stifle and destroy my children’s economic future with policies that have NEVER worked in the past and will NEVER work in the future. They will never work because they rely on those who earn a paycheck to bear the heavy and heavier cross of taking care of those who think every material thing is a "right". NO! The only rights you have are to make the most of your life with what talents God has given you and to develop those talents without some overbearing government making it harder for you to do so.

    This is what this whole thing is about. It is an ideological battle. Freedom, individualism and capitalism vs Communism dressed up as soft core socialism. I understand that completely now and I will not waver in my resolve.

    So take your 2 cent coffee and throw it out the window. I like a nice Earl Grey. And besides, you latte liberals are really giving Starbucks a bad name.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Regarding the characterization of Ms. Park, is there a term that expresses more contempt than "parasite?" I think she's a sort of saboteur of real grassroots activism and an agent provocateur who tries to stir up the lumpenproletariat to attack taxpayers who are standing up for fiscal rectictude and government accountability.

    If I wasn't such a literalist about the Constitution, I'd deem Park to be a traitor--but I'll leave the hyperbole to the "Coffee Party."

    Whenever one of these Obama apologists uses the term "tea bagger" you have full license to take the gloves off. That is not a civil term; it is lewd and pornographic and it is most avowedly NOT what we call ourselves.

    Every leftist pundit who uses that term should receive no quarter and no mercy on us. If coffee is accidentally spilled on laps or in faces, so be it.

    ReplyDelete
  41. A manufactured counter-movement? Why am I not surprised. Given what we now know about BO's first campaign, this seems to fit the pattern. Bummer for them that we are on to their tactics.

    Left Coast Rebel has a great post with further information about this sham. http://www.leftcoastrebel.com/2010/03/bitter-cup-of-coffee-party-digging-up.html

    ReplyDelete
  42. Theteapartyisover dot com or whatever it was...

    "tea-baggers"

    "coffee" party

    Feeling the heat, libs? Imitation is the purest form of flattery.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I'd just like to point out that, rather than "taking over" a host, a parasite kills its host.

    ReplyDelete
  44. ...I'm so ashamed to see nutcase liberal bitch ...
    Communism..."


    So what we got here is a bunch of people more interested in enjoying their hatred than working together to solve problems.

    Fine, enjoy yer time. The Aristocracy loves it when we hate on each other, cuz then we can't see them laughing at us.

    BTW: It amuses me to see people upset at getting called Teabaggers since it was all-y'all that started calling yourself Teabaggers FIRST! Now when I do meet some Tea Party Patriots who are willing to have a civil discussion, and there are many but not among your leadership, well I don't use the rude term except when we're raggin' on each other a bit (real people aren't afraid to make a little fun of each other when we're otherwise giving each other respect.)

    One thing you won't see is $200 tickets to a coffee party or a $100,000 speaking fee for someone demanding less health care for Americans.

    ReplyDelete
  45. "Ms. Zernike declined, explaining that she had to limit her article to 700 words PER SHILL FOR OBAMA."

    /fixed it.

    Great work, Professor Jacobson!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Interesting how reading this blog, and the comments to it, that the majority of posts are so remarkably hateful. Civil discourse includes the actual discussion of relevant topics, but all the people posting here seem to be interested in is name-calling, spewing vitriol, and apparently the total destruction of any kind of governance. Is it any wonder that no thoughtful person takes you seriously? If you wish to be taken as seriously as you claim that you are, replace the anger with some level-headed, well-informed and CONSTRUCTIVE conversation about things that we can actually DO instead of bitching endlessly with increasing volume. Because it seems like the only thing you are interested in doing is drowning out every other voice within the radius of your bloviating. And that infringes on my right to free speech, and that of others who are just as much citizens of this nation as you are. Shame on you.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Whose leg did Kate have to hump to get 713 words with a 700 word limit?

    ReplyDelete
  48. As someone over at JustOneMinute pointed out, Chock-Full-O-Nuts.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Great work Professor. This whole movement didn't pass my smell test, but, I thought Plouffe was behind it.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "It amuses me to see people upset at getting called Teabaggers since it was all-y'all that started calling yourself Teabaggers FIRST"Um, no. It was people from the Donkey party who came up with that particular vulgarity.

    ReplyDelete
  51. "BTW: It amuses me to see people upset at getting called Teabaggers since it was all-y'all that started calling yourself Teabaggers FIRST!"

    No, flat-out wrong actually; Anderson Cooper has that odious distinction. "All" us certainly did NOT find it so wonderfully repeatable as did the usual leftist talking heads... who gave the lie that we refer to ourselves in such a manner, without even being able to name as much as a single person.

    This is exactly what I'm talking about how people get suckered by the Peacock... don't be a 'cock sucker.

    They also give the lie that there is some sort of acknowledged leadership. There isn't, and it's intentional. This is a movement of consensus and mutual reinforcement. There is no "head of the beast" to cut off; as much as the character assassins might wish for one, it won't be that easy.

    These are Americans revelling in their defense of rugged individualism against the destructive nanny state, and any "direction" of the movement comes from any equal member based purely on the merits of the idea, not upon subjective "elite establishment credentials" of the originator, and acted upon by concurring individuals.

    Such actions may lead you to identify what you perceive as a leader of a moment... but don't fool yourself, Tea Partiers are ALL leaders. Which is kind of the point of a group of like minded individuals tired of being told what to do by their "betters."

    "Betters" who apparently haven't figured out that $200 tickets and $100,000 speaking fees (which were 100% reinvested into publicity and political action) are left to the discretion of the individual rather than a mandate from the state. Those who wanted to contribute, did. Those who didn't, didn't. And the idea that any of this is somehow a negative to be avoided is just another example of the ludicrous progressive determination to dictate how others choose to spend their earnings.

    Raise your hand if you want to bet money this coffee party will never solicit donations for any purpose. Yeah that's what I thought.

    Nice non-sequitur about "demanding less health care." I guess you think demanding LESS GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION always leads to shortages, just like those poor states that did away with CON laws. They now have to suffer with only THIRTY TIMES as many hospitals per capita as states which kept regulatory meddling in place. Poor fools, how ever will they survive without the omniscient state dictating how many hospitals is too many, and therefore "less healthcare"?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Is this the frontal assault on the tea Party that Clinton and Carville had in mind? Lame.This is just another way for the liberals to try and push thier Scocialist agenda.This is one train that won't leave the station.Typical of them to try and hitch onto the Conservative shooting star.They cannot even come up with anything original.

    ReplyDelete
  53. If you take a casual look at the clips on youtube, by my eye, they bear a striking resemblance to the look and feel of the Obama campaign promos. You could chalk it up to the fact that Anabal Park has some experience with editing (there's a clip from 2008 where she's personally interviewing Kal Penn as he wax poetic about his mancrush with Barry). But if you look at the Atlanta and LA "coffe"-stainer clips, there's a pretty impressive level of production, music, and editing. It looks very professional. Which is amazing considering they've only been around for a month?! I'm going to go out on a limb and say that David Plouffe's arrival back at the White House in January is no coincidence.

    Also, the man-on-the street "interviews" in the Atlanta clip look unusually stiff and made up. It reminds you of those 2 AM male enhancement infomercials where a hostess interviews "random men" on the street with their unusually attractive partners who are also impressed with the product.

    The whole thing smells fishy.

    ReplyDelete
  54. "Interesting how reading this blog, and the comments to it, that the majority of posts are so remarkably hateful. Civil discourse includes the actual discussion of relevant topics, but all the people posting here seem to be interested in is name-calling, spewing vitriol, and apparently the total destruction of any kind of governance. Is it any wonder that no thoughtful person takes you seriously?"


    That is truly hilarious. The lack of self-awareness among left-wingers never ceases to amaze me. Guess what? I do hate leftists. I think you're human excrement. But I haven't always felt this way. Actually, it has taken 15 years of living in New York City in a social circle of mostly well educated, affluent liberals and quietly humoring their insular prattle and dishonest political invective to reach this point. The only dialog I'm interested in having at this point is with people who are not already afflicted with your toxic worldview. I'll leave attempts to persuade leftists to people with more time than sense.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Ms. Zernike went over anyway. Her essay has 713 words.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Christyne, you probably don't see the irony of writing a hateful comment about us being "hateful". It's typical for libs. Alwayls lecturing to stop the very things that they are doing.

    And BTW, NOBODY is suppressing your freedom of speech. Only Congress can do that. You might want to actually read the Constitution before making such a fool of yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Christyne, I level-headedly well-informedly, and constructively suggest you read the Constitution. Your right to free speech protects you from the government prosecuting you from saying arbitrarily "illegal things." It does not protect you from being rightly ridiculed by the public for saying "clueless things." You had your say, and you weren't thrown in jail. That's all anyone is entitled to.

    You obviously have no idea what "hatred" is. Founding a group based on the automatic negative game-saying of partisanship, and then slandering about 20% of your fellow citizens with incessant sexual innuendo is hatred. Then hiding behind a fig leaf of "oh, but we're for civil discourse" wouldn't fool my collie. The RESPONSE is not hatred, but righteous indignation.

    Nobody "hates" you, but if you're going to hide behind feigned ignorance and hyperbole, we're certainly going to mock you. "Gosh, how could anybody be upset that they were satirized, insulted, and then condescended to of how they have no right to be upset?"

    Show us one commenter who advocated "total destruction of any kind of governance." Do you REALLY wonder why "all" the people posting here were called names, and are now inexplicably "interested" in name-calling? Is it any wonder no thoughtful person takes you seriously? We don't hate you, but we're not laughing WITH you either...

    And if you're spewing vitriol, go see a doctor (while you still can). But if you're just complaining about OTHER people's first amendment rights, then shame on you. I hope you appreciate the irony of your misguided bit of bloviating, which regrettably, was not drowned out.

    But I'M FOR civil discourse, so you are not allowed to be upset with anything I've written. Contradicting me would only be bitching endlessly with increasing volume. So I get the last word... because I'm for civil discourse...

    NYAH NYAH NYAH NYCIVILDISCOURSE!

    ReplyDelete
  58. So can we all use misogynist asian slurs against this little astro-turfing Commie fraud, Annabel Park, like the Leftists use against Michelle Malkin? How about I start off and wish this little NorK a quick trip home to her comrades? "Teabagger" smears, Nancy Pelosi(D)'s lies, faux-teaparty frauds and now this little arrogant beotch. Next up please?

    ReplyDelete
  59. DANEgerus - She's a leftist. She's trying to bring North Korea's form of government here. And no, we can't use the misogynist asian slurs, because misogynistic bigotry is pretty much the purview of the left.

    And was little NorK also intended as a pun?
    http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/NORK

    ReplyDelete
  60. I wanted to give them a chance. Last week, I registered on their site and posted a comment, and I went back to the site a couple days ago. Saw some "tea bagger" references, but my own comment (which was in no way derogatory) was still pending.

    For a group that claims to want civil discourse, they sure don't act it.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I don't understand what these people are organizing for. Activism in SUPPORT of the government, i.e. the people who have a monopoly on the legitimate use of deadly force? What more could they possibly want? They have the presidency and huge majorities in both houses of Congress. They get to smear and ridicule the teapartiers with impunity. Heck, even the president has come out against the tea partiers; the president of the United States ridiculing ordinary Americans (never thought I'd see the day). In comparison, the tea partiers have mobilized AGAINST the government, armed only with their ability to organize, their voices and some home-made signs. Which takes more courage? BTW, I wonder if the coffeebaggers (see Urban dictionary; it's worse than "teabagger") had any trouble scraping the "protest is the highest form of patriotism" bumper stickers off their cars. I also wonder if they'll have nice mocha-colored t-shirts made up.

    ReplyDelete
  62. .

    What did John Stewart call these people? "...The Most Trusted Name In Over-Caffeinated Control Freaks" I think Annabel fits this definition... or at least those "Coffee Party" folk.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  63. WarDamnEagle - Andrew Klavan gives you the answer here:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHgUE9AD4s

    ReplyDelete
  64. A cheerful 2 thumbs up on Captain Obvious in 2012.

    ReplyDelete
  65. All of the the Obamites I have tried to have a civil discourse with have ended in name calling and insults on their part. Their only discourse they want to hear is for me to agree that AGW is real and that "Cap-n-Trade" is really good for the country; ObamaCare is the greatest thing since sliced bread; the govt has the smartest people in the world and know better than us rabble; and that Obama is the greatest president "evar!"

    Anything shy of total agreement with THEM, I'm a "stoopid", "racists", "teabagging" "Redneck" and Obama's govt needs to do something about me.

    No thanx - I'll just keep to my self, wait till November, and steep in my own tea cup of racist hatred.

    heh

    ReplyDelete
  66. What are the Coffee people going to protest? Obama isn't on TV enough? Obama needs to come to our homes to remind us to brush our teeth, turn off our lights and use only one square of toilet paper?

    Hello! Their guys are in office. They put 'em there. What do they have to protest? So sad.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I sure don't care to align myself with the illiterate hollering of the crazies in the tea party.

    I'd much rather the engage in the "civil discourse" of the Coffee Party.

    ReplyDelete
  68. William,

    wow.... you got all the meatheads coming along to read your blog. Congratulations on such a fine effort.

    The Hillbuzz boys could have a ball going over the troll droppings that are in the comments field of this post.... and they are so obvious with their silly talking points.

    First of all to Captain Obvious, great work sir with your responses to the trolls.

    Second, what Ms Park and her mob do not realize is that there are people, Indies, Republicans and moderate middle of the road Democrats who have come together in opposition to Dr. Utopia.

    The point is that people are very capable of seeing through the tilt towards Marxism.

    Ms Park can stick her coffee party... she has no clue about the historical significance of a TEA party.....as in the original Boston Tea Party... and that is what makes this slapstick attempt to counter the TEA movement so ridiculous.

    The TEA movement is made up of individuals from all walks of life - blacks, whites, old, young, middle-aged, parents, Asians, Indians, and yes even gays are a part of the movement. It is a true grassroots movement. I think for the first time since the Vietnam War era, we do have a true grassroots movement.

    Dr. Utopia's term as president is almost up, and there is no way that he should have a second term. Just like Carter he is washed up... or to put it another way... he pretends to be intelligent but he simply has no Wisdom. You cannot have as President someone who constantly votes "present". Turning his back on America's allies is amongst the dumbest of his actions....

    ReplyDelete
  69. So you're a big fan of freedom and fiscal responsibility, eh? But you feel out of place at Tea Parties, because they jumped the shark and have gone full blooded neocon? Well then, welcome to The Beer Party!

    http://kl.am/beerparty

    ReplyDelete
  70. HEY COFFEE PARTIERS
    AXELROD CALLED
    HE WANTS HIS STUPID IDEA BACK!

    I guess the left does believe that no stupid idea should go to waste..lmao...

    ReplyDelete
  71. What's amazing is that the All Barack Channel (ABC News) announced recently that it's shuttering all but its Washington bureau, laying off "journalists" etc and so forth--so how's that hopey changey thing working out for the lamestream media? Not so well since they're adding to the unemployment numbers. And they're just the first, leader of the dying pack, so to speak.

    Coffee party, my ass. Go on and promote it, oh mighty lamestream media. Real Americans are not going to fooled. Oh, how the mighty hath fallen.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Ah, the irony of watching these gaia fetishizing fair trade jackholes create a "coffee party" that isn't organic. They'd evidently prefer to use big media to deceive the peasants into believing that they're the voice of THE PEOPLE.

    It really is the left in a nutshell isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  73. From your post, above:

    "I told Ms. Zernike that I would do an update to this post, and I hoped that she would do an update to her article to explain Park's Obama connection and apparent motivations. Ms. Zernike declined, explaining that she had to limit her article to 700 words."

    Great punch line, Bill! Heh.

    At that point, you could have graciously offered to do it for her in the form of a comment following the article. Oh, no, wait . . . the New York Times doesn't have a comment thread following the article.

    But, she could have offered to keep the conversation going by posting about the topic of the origins and affiliations of the "Coffee Party" on the New York Times blog, The Caucus, no?

    After all, Kate Zernike is certainly no stranger to posting on such topics on The Caucus, especially when it comes to posting about the Tea Party.

    Just for the record, it doesn't look like she had any word limitation on that post! My word processing program counts 1,369 words as a matter of fact, which is nearly twice the limit she cited in her response to you!

    Heck, Kate even has NYT fellow contributor Bernie Becker touting her article on The Caucus about the "Coffee Party."

    Here is what he said:

    "Coffee Klatches: The Times’s Kate Zernike notes the quick growth of an online gathering known as the "Coffee Party," which started on Facebook and has been collecting thousands of fans since its recent inception."

    And, on the Caucus, Bernie has also recently noted a WaPo article by Dan Zak about the group.

    Gee, is it my imagination, or do the folks at the New York Times -- including Kate Zernike -- appear to be actively participating in "wishing" this so-called movement into existence?

    Gosh, I didn't think it was appropriate for reporters to do things like that!

    Huh!

    ReplyDelete
  74. Well the good news is that they are listening and you're having an impact. Maybe we can convert them out of liberalism.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Seems like the Dems only know dirty tricks. Check this one out: Democrats or accomplices register a Nevada "Tea" Party to split the conservative vote and keep Harry Reid in office. http://bit.ly/9bfJ1X

    ReplyDelete
  76. Great work, Prof....thank you.

    Quoted from and Linked to at:
    When I Take My Sugar To Tea...

    ReplyDelete
  77. WOW. THe Coffee party is a completely grass movement org. I just randomly came across it two days ago. I signed up immediatley after reading the manifesto which is awesome! Not only myself, but now almost one MILLION people have signed up to host parties all over the country in less then three weeks.

    People are just sick of what they are seeing at the tea parties. Screaming lunatics, with racially hate filled rhetoric and frankly disgusting and offensive signage, railing about secceeding, and being obstructionist while screeching at the top of their klungs that they dont want to pay taxes yet many are collecting fat retirement checks complete with healthcare coverage just does not appeal to people anymore.

    The tea party movement is self imploding, leaving many in the outer circles disenfranchised. The Coffee Party movement is a non denominational, non party affiliated movement promoting civil discourse, equity and equality and problnm solving for the real issues rather than screaming about "We need to return to the original constitution", unammended which would essentially return slavery, prevent a womans right to vote and repeal the civil rights act.

    We are a common sense organization, rather than a knee jerk dark racist underbelly movement. We are Coffee because we embrace people of all races, sexes, nationalities and beliefs. That is the difference that appeals to Coffee party members, many of which are defecting from the tea party for just that reason. We slosh through the rhetoric and clear up the air.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Well, congratulations Anne Punohu, March 6, 2010 1:17 PM, above . . . you have managed in four succinct graphs to state precisely the opposite of the truth about both the tea party movement, and the ersatz COFFEE "party."

    Quite clearly COFFEE is no grassroots endeavor as Prof. Jacobson and others have very persuasively established, including by demonstrating its "creation" by an Obamaite campaign operative with employment ties to the New York Times.

    Further, your caricature-laden description of tea party events could not be much more uninformed, including your thoroughly slanderous claim that tea partiers somehow seek a return to slavery, and the accompanying nasty assertion that it manifests a "knee jerk dark racist underbelly."

    Gee, I suppose next you'll be assuring us that that continuing to fling such baseless bile about is all part of the COFFEE effort to "clear up the air" . . . oh wait, you did do that!

    Were it not for certain unmistakable signs of your giddy and uncritical enthusiasm for the COFFEE scam, I might have even taken your "WOW missive" as a first draft for a submission to the Onion, or some other site featuring outlandish parody postings. I had to read it again to be sure!

    Sadly, however, it appears that you have really swallowed the entire truckload of their nonsense!

    Oh, well. Perhaps one day you'll open your eyes to the reality of COFFEE and, as Gertrude Stein once quipped about Oakland, concede that "there is no there there."

    But, rest assured that few of us will be holding our breaths in anticipation. We know that belief in some deep fantasies can linger for a long, long time!

    ReplyDelete
  79. Jeff, you posted a comment on March 2nd regarding people receiving social security and medicare, my question to you, who the hell do you think paid into that system? The same people who are collecting it. If they had been free to make a choice, no doubt, many of them would not have participated in this ponzi scheme and made much better investments and much better returns! Now let me see if you can espouse that same venom to welfare recipients? No, that's not a racist comment, people from all walks of life are on welfare for generations, so don't turn your "bs" comments on me! Parasites, oh yeah, we have some parasites alright and if you weren't so concerned with your progressive agenda, you might be able to see it! Yeah, I said it and you are entitled to my opinion! We are mad as hell and we are not taking it any more. Get use to the idea. VN8

    ReplyDelete
  80. Trackback: http://republicanheretic.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/on-the-coffee-party/

    ReplyDelete
  81. Coffee Party (CP) may be disingenuous, but nothing like a parasite. There is no data - NONE - to support the outrageous assertion that the CP is feeding on the TP, much less threatening to take it over.

    Also, the use of the title "Coffee Party Parasites" next to a picture of Annabel Park looking out of sorts strongly suggests you are calling her a parasite, and that's utterly reprehensible. Calling anyone a political "parasite" is rhetoric reserved for twisted demagogues. You should be ashamed.

    PS (you're really talking about parasitoid, not parasite: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism )

    ReplyDelete
  82. God Bless all Liberals! If I were to choose a word to describe myself politically it definately would be "Liberal" which comes from Latin meaning "free", you know like "Liberty"! I would rather be "free", than Conservative which means "oppostion to change". I'm all for change when our country is in such dire straits!The words Liberal and Conservative speak for themselves by definition. I want change, not status quo! Remember what Ben Franklin said, you can have a Republic, if you can keep it.

    ReplyDelete