Culpepper Society
April 20, 2009- Santa Barbara Tea Party has established the Culpepper Society as the social club for the activist group. Named after the popular Culpepper flag used during the American Revolution, their mascot is Patrick Henry. Culpepper Society holds functions and provides volunteers for tea parties and events.
Join now.
Wonderful. I’m in. What time is the 4th of July Tea Party at the Courthouse event?
Please register and see our Home Page for information. In brief, SBTP & CS will present two events in celebration of the 4th of July: a Rally at De la Guerra Plaza on Independence Day Eve (7-3 @ 7), and our participation in SB’s 4th of July Parade (7-4), which assembles between Micheltorena and Sola @ State, which is the Bankruptcy Court block – not SB County Courthouse. Thank you.
Why is there not a store to purchase items such as t-shirts, flags, etc to help raise revenue for our local cause?
We are focused on events. There are numerous places online to purchase tea party products. Thank you for your support.
On August 13, 2009, there was a public meeting in front of Lois Capps’s office on East Carrillo Street. Approximately 200+ people appeared. There was loud talking and singing. Because of my disability I was unable to walk down the street where I could understaand what was being said.. I met Mr. Delgado and had a very interesting conversatioin about the status of our country today. With the strength of people like your group, we can overcome the evil which has invaded our government. I look forward to meeting with you at Fess Parker’s on Friday, August 21.
Having attended SB Carrillo at Garden and SM Library teaparty events
my experience is courteous and rational members who wish to avoid intimidation should be seated much earlier than announced time. ACORN/SEIU/Capps activists will be there very early in my experience. I found them badgering and confrontational while I was just present to be visibly present in protest.
Andy Caldwell ran an exceptional SM forum with 1 minute speaker (stopwatched) and one by one folks relinquished their inside places in line to those waiting outside with their hastily prepared notes. Outside amplification would have been VERY helpful as an orderly crowd equalled the seated attendees. Everyone was heard and recorded within the time frame!!
Thank you for your visibility and rational, courteous respondents. Muffy Casberg Deats
Tea Party Groups have their own geographical territories, which are respected by other tea party groups. SBTP is the established group that is listed nationally as the organization that puts on tea party events in the City of Santa Barbara; it also serves Goleta, Carpinteria and Montecito. The group was initially founded in March 2009 and reorganized in April 2009 with the Culpepper Society.
By unanimous committee decision, SBTP was not involved with nor in any way or means associated with the 8/13 event at Mrs. Capp’s Office; that event was run by some out of town residents. Mr. Caldwell’s Santa Maria “Townhall” was part of his Plunger Rebellion Series. He does an excellent job with every event he organizes. He deserves high praise.
SBTP HC Forum, “What’s Up, Doc,” held on 8/28, was recognized by a senior state official as “more than probably the finest health care forum held to date in the US.”
Correction: SBTP’s HC Forum was on 8/21. It was a full house with over 450 attendees.
Correction for Prior Post re 8/13 event: Media estimated 250 to 325 supporters of Congresswoman Capps turned out for a rally at her office environs against approximately a few dozen anti-Capps protestors.
Last March when Andy did the Tea Party I signed up for email announcements however I have not been receiving any updates. Could you please sign me up again?
Carl – We would be more than happy to add you to our email list. Please go to the Membership Page, fill in the blanks, and click submit. Thank you. SBTP
In his defense of the Supreme Court’s decision to allow corporations to spend all they want to on public elections, Steve Chapman, in his January 26th op-ed, stated: “In reality, most business people are not about to plunge into divisive elections.” That could be true if those business people were obliged to identify themselves in their advertising. But without that constraint, they are anonymous and the loudest voices (read, the most money spent on TV political campaigns) almost always win.
If the board of directors of the corporation in which I own stock decided to back Candidate A but I think he’s a bum and prefer Candidate B, am I not backing the candidate whom I don’t like with my money? Sure, I can always sell my stock, but how am I going to know who my corporation is backing?
Congress needs to require full disclosure. They need to require corporate-backed campaigns to identify themselves so we know who is backing whom. Of course corporations will fight that concept because it could lead to boycotts of their products.
As with anything else in our constitutional democracy, all freedoms must be reasonably controlled to keep people, and corporations, honest and to keep them from savaging the innocent.
Freedom “reasonably controlled” is not freedom. It should be noted that the term “corporation” means a lot of different things and when the McCain-Feingold bill was passed, it created some interesting bed-fellows, i.e., The National Rifle Association and their arch nemesis, the American Civil Liberties Union, joined together in their protest of the legislation. These are advocate “corporations” which would have been guilty of a FELONY if they had openly campaigned for a candidate within 60 days of a national election. Think about it. You could form a group, or be part of a group, such as the Tea Party, put together an ad or commercial with funds obtained internally or from outside donors and you could be guilty of a felony.
It should also be noted that despite what the chief occupant of the government housing facility at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. said, the Supreme Court let stand that portion of the law which prohibits contributions from foreign sources.
The US Supreme Court’s recent decision on campaign contributions defines that individuals, whether a sole person or corporation, have no limits on how they contribute to political efforts; so while there is no restriction on contributions, there now also the possbility of an equal distribution of ideas politically.