Smart Girl Politics: Founding Sisters of the Tea Party movement

By Michelle Malkin  •  September 18, 2009 02:46 PM

I’m in Nashville today for the inaugural Smart Girl Politics summit.

These ladies were instrumental in the Tea Party movement and are organizing limited government activists across the country at the local and state level. It’s an incredible story — and you’ll never hear/read about it in the Washington Post Style section or on The View.

SGP is a great way for blogosphere/social networking newcomers to get involved.

You can watch the summit live and learn more about the group here.

Posted in: Blogosphere, Tea Party

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments


  1. #1
    On September 18th, 2009 at 2:56 pm, letget said:

    Thank ‘Smart Girl Politics’ and all involved for us Michelle. Million upon millions have come out to see our Republic is not cratered due to people like y’all.
    L

  2. #2
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:07 pm, stillontheroad said:

    A sleeping giant has awoken folks? You bet cha.

  3. #3
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:14 pm, battleaxe said:

    Maybe the states should put a fat tax on Uncle Sam – he’s getting rather obese these days.

  4. #4
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:17 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    Parallel universe Michelle Malkin: “CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT THEY’D SAY IF THEY HAD A SMART MAN POLITICS SUMMIT?”

  5. #5
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:21 pm, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

    Smart Girl Politics and good looking too I’ll wager (brag on the gals-makes life better). It was a basically shy gal here who organized our first Tea Party. Smart gal-she got my wife to get me to make up 100 notification signs.

    Smart Girls do shy well -good looking too I’ll wager.

  6. #6
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:21 pm, Jet Jaguar said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:17 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    Parallel universe Michelle Malkin: “CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT THEY’D SAY IF THEY HAD A SMART MAN POLITICS SUMMIT?”

    Well, when men get together for a politics summit, they don’t have to qualify it. ;)

  7. #7
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:23 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    By the way, here’s a nice little video which I think is pretty typical of Republicans’ indifference to the problems of Americans.

  8. #8
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:23 pm, Illbay said:

    What has happened to make such “activism” necessary?

    Is it the collapse of the political party system, that has foisted weak or thoroughly unpalatable candidates on us? Why was John McCain able to be nominated last year? How was BHO, a proven leftist radical, chosen by the Democrats with really not much difficulty even in the face of “strong” opposition?

    Why is it that, after the die is cast and we have a President who is the ANTITHESIS of America, we finally have people coming out of the wood-work to oppose him. Wouldn’t it have been easier to prevent his election in the first place?

    Rush Limbaugh and others warn against going the “third party route,” but what is the alternative when the Bob Doles, John McCains and (dare I say it) George W. Bushes of the party have such an easy time winning the nominations over solid conservative candidates?

    Those men aren’t conservative in any way, shape, or form; just a few years ago they’d have been perfectly comfortable as Democrats (and John McCain was apparently considered for the V.P. slot alongside John F. Kerry).

    In short, what difference to all these protests really make in the makeup of those who “rule over” us (in their way of thinking). Unless we can oust the anti-American left, AND the squishy “moderates,” and fill the seats of Congress at least with those who take the Constitution seriously, then all it does is keep the “alternative conservative media” bloggers, authors and so forth, in business? Yeah, it’s great to have a book on the NYT Bestseller list (even when the NYT won’t even publish a review), but you risk being the dogs barking at the caravan as it passes.

    That’s just not good enough. How long can you stay angry just for the sake of anger, when nothing changes?

  9. #9
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:29 pm, Illbay said:

    RED STATE SKEPTIC: All you people have left is “spin.” The statement that Rep. Gingrey made was of course right on the money, yet you choose to spin it as if he’s “making light” of the reality.

    That’s like noting that hundreds of people lose their lives every year to drunk driving, and then whining about improved seat-restraint systems – and of course, anyone who might scoff at improved seat-restraint systems is being “insensitive.”

    Here’s the thing you people haven’t got yet: you no longer get to have Walter Cronkite, or Tom Brokaw, or Dan Rather, or the New York Times editorial board frame the discussion.

    You don’t get to define the terms any more. People have wised up.

  10. #10
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:46 pm, J S Ragman said:

    RSS

    I think that would have to be a “Smart Boy Politics Summit”, but that would probably be racist, or something.

  11. #11
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:53 pm, stillontheroad said:

    Red State Skeptic said:
    I can hear the desperation from your inane posts — Now go sulk in your sand box and pound some nice and tight and make our day.

  12. #12
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:54 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    RED STATE SKEPTIC: All you people have left is “spin.” The statement that Rep. Gingrey made was of course right on the money, yet you choose to spin it as if he’s “making light” of the reality.

    That’s like noting that hundreds of people lose their lives every year to drunk driving, and then whining about improved seat-restraint systems – and of course, anyone who might scoff at improved seat-restraint systems is being “insensitive.”

    OK, two things here. One, you can argue that you don’t deserve crap if you don’t have a job. Fine. But the real problem is that you basically can’t get health insurance if you lose your job unless you are rich. You can work hard, save money, get a nice little nest egg, but then the next recession comes around, and you lose your job, and BOOM you’re screwed.

    The fact is – and correct me if I’m wrong – the US is the only country in the world where most people get insurance through their job, which isn’t because the free markets worked it out that way, but because of a weird idiosyncracy of American labor where the government mandated wage controls during WW2, and the only way employers could sweeten the pot was to offer better benefits. Sixty years later, where does that get us?

    And yes, laughing at people losing their jobs is pretty classless.

  13. #13
    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:57 pm, stillontheroad said:

    Red State Skeptic said:
    And this new health care system where it is mandated everyone must have insurance, employed or not, and if you do not get it you will be fined $3k odd?
    Unemployed and still have to pay for insurance — where does that money come from pray tell?

  14. #14
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:03 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    And this new health care system where it is mandated everyone must have insurance, employed or not, and if you do not get it you will be fined $3k odd?

    Unemployed and still have to pay for insurance — where does that money come from pray tell?

    I sure as hell would rather have a mandate to buy affordable health insurance than have a choice to buy insurance I can’t afford.

  15. #15
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:16 pm, chapoutier said:

    And yes, laughing at people losing their jobs is pretty classless.

    Wow. The way you make it sound he was slapping his side and about ready to pee himself. That was –at most– an incredulous chuckle about the argument being made. No one who watches that fairly could say he was laughing at people losing their jobs.

  16. #16
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:17 pm, IndyRich said:

    RSS,

    where the government mandated wage controls during WW2, and the only way employers could sweeten the pot was to offer better benefits. Sixty years later, where does that get us?

    See what imposing government regulations does to free markets?

    He was not laughing at people losing their jobs. He was laughing at Obama and the Democrats who think they need to fix healthcare in order for these people to keep their coverage when they really need jobs.

    Adding government run healthcare and increasing taxes on businesses is not going to allow businesses to expand their workforce.

  17. #17
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:17 pm, Reliq6 said:

    I left a full time position to move to NJ and be a contractor – that means bigger pay but no job tied insurance. Okay fine – I had Cobra from the full time job – problem was it was ridiculous expensive.

    Did I cry, whine, and ask for a handout for my wife and twins? Nope – researched insurance providers, guess what? You can get in on some decent coverage for affordable $ if you take some time and do some haggling with the companies. There’s even groups of individual contractors, small businesses etc that you can find to get even more savings.

    When you do it this way – you can CHOOSE how much coverage you want and how much you want to pay. It’s out there already. It just takes effort to find and execute. Just think how much better and cheaper it *could* be if you take down the limitations of companies selling across state lines.

    We don’t need this non-existent Obama plan, or any of the other 1000 page boondoggles. We need some common sense and a little effort, some small changes and mostly for people to understand that they need to take care of themselves instead of looking for Gov coddling cradle to grave.

    One other note – when I left another full time job to my current one…we had about 2 months of either paying for Cobra to continue the bridge coverage or save $2k and “risk it” until my next policy went in to effect. We CHOSE to “risk it”. Now – if I can’t prove to the Gov that I have 12 months coverage if this garbage is passed – do I get a fat ole fine for wanting to make our own decision with our health coverage??

    Point is I don’t need the gov to hold my hand here RSS. I would venture to say most folks, 80% and counting that are happy with their current situation, don’t either.

    Screw your government mandates – I want to be FREE to make my own decisions.

  18. #18
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:26 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

    And if you’re on Twitter, make sure to use the #sgp hashtag as well.

  19. #19
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:29 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    Smart Girl Politics

    You Go, Girls!

  20. #20
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:35 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:17 pm, Reliq6 said:

    Just think how much better and cheaper it *could* be if you take down the limitations of companies selling across state lines.

    Oh sure. Republicans had years with free reign over Congress and didn’t do squat to make healthcare more affordable or accessible. You could have a thousand different policy proposals that *could* work, but no one knows because it was never a priority for conservatives when you had a chance to make a difference.

  21. #21
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:40 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:16 pm, chapoutier said:

    No one who watches that fairly could say he was laughing at people losing their jobs.

    I’ll have take it up with the Fairly Police. I took it as a jab that if you’re out of work, chuckle, of course you don’t have healthcare. Which to reiterate is I think a pretty typical attitude of Republicans.

  22. #22
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:41 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:23 pm, Illbay said:

    Why was John McCain able to be nominated last year?

    Lots of reasons…

    1) Democrats and Independents voting in Republican primaries

    2) ACORN supported John McCain.

    3) A combination of bias in the MSM and blogosphere (even HotAir’s Allahpundit and Michelle herself were unfair towards Huckabee… Huckabee was the only candidate who agreed to Senator Jeff Sessions’ points and promised to build fences on both borders by July 2010, yet Michelle called Huckabee an Immigration Drag-Queen)

    4) McCain had stalking horses to help him win SC and FL.

    5) Romney promised, on February 5th, to fight all the way to the convention. I wish he had. Instead, he met with “prominent Republicans” in a closed-door meeting on the 6th, pulled out of the race on the 7th, and “released” his delegates to McCain on the 14th. Romney sold-out to McCain instead of keeping his word.

    6) The Republican Party itself started pressuring people to unite behind McCain mere weeks after his 4th place finish in Iowa.

    7) CNN cancelled a debate previously scheduled for February 28th. Had it been held, it could have made a difference in the March 4th primaries and onward.

    Theres more…
    McCain a Choice? More Like an Echo

  23. #23
    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:57 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:41 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    1) Democrats and Independents voting in Republican primaries

    Not in closed primaries that McCain still won overwhelmingly.

    5) Romney promised, on February 5th, to fight all the way to the convention. I wish he had. Instead, he met with “prominent Republicans” in a closed-door meeting on the 6th, pulled out of the race on the 7th, and “released” his delegates to McCain on the 14th. Romney sold-out to McCain instead of keeping his word.

    Do y’all SERIOUSLY thank Romney ever does ANYTHING but sell out? Has he ever taken a position that wasn’t politically expedient?

    (Plus I know we’re supposed to be tolerant of everyone, but can’t we draw the line at Mormons? For crying out loud, it was founded by the most bs lying sack of sh*t who concocted a story about Jesus smiting the bad Jews by turning them red like the evil Injuns. And it was an officially racist organization when Romney was a leader in the church! Come on, just say no to these bastards.)

  24. #24
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:00 pm, stillontheroad said:

    Red State Skeptic Said:

    Where does the money come from?

  25. #25
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:05 pm, Jet Jaguar said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 3:23 pm, Red State Skeptic said:

    By the way, here’s a nice little video which I think is pretty typical of Republicans’ indifference to the problems of Americans.

    Now come on, RSS. Surely you can see that he’s not laughing about people losing health insurance. He’s criticizing the Obama administration’s actions that have exacerbated our economic problems resulting in unemployment.

  26. #26
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:08 pm, Jet Jaguar said:

    Here’s a video back at you, RSS. Dogs are great judges of character. :)

  27. #27
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:11 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    Red State Skeptic,
    I’m not taking your bait. But I will ask you:

    Do you SERIOUSLY think Obama has ever been ANYTHING but a radical communist?

    Has he ever taken a position contrary to that of Bill Ayers, Van Jones, or the stated program of the Communist Party USA?

  28. #28
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:38 pm, flenser said:

    But the real problem is that you basically can’t get health insurance if you lose your job unless you are rich.

    That’s not true. Health insurance for normal people costs about what you’d pay for cable TV.

    If you try to buy insurance and you have a pre-existing condition it’s different, but don’t try to pretend that health insurance is out of the reach of average American.

  29. #29
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:40 pm, rocketman said:

    ***
    HI ITOOKTHEREDPILL–Anyone with half a brain and access to President Obama’s videotaped speeches and to his voting record in the Illinois and U.S. Senate recognized a socialist / statist / marxist / communist “useful idiot”. The commies talk a good fight for justice–as your post of their new manifesto points out.
    ***
    Just ignore the “reality checks” of Stalin’s Gulags, Mao’s “re-education” camps, Pol Pot’s countryside death camps, Castro’s abuse of the Cuban People.
    ***
    Send any U.S. citizen to live as a poor Cuban for a year or two and see how they like this “humane, just” system then. Or read Yoanni Sanchez’s GENERACIONY blog to see what The Messiah and his ilk have planned for us. They are bringing it on now.
    ***
    John Bibb
    ***

  30. #30
    On September 18th, 2009 at 5:47 pm, Mister P said:

    but the real problem is that you basically can’t get health insurance if you lose your job unless you are rich.

    Red State, hijack threads much?
    1. First off, you can’t buy ANYTHING if you don’t have a job and saved money, that is why WE WORK. That is also why the first obligation the President has after security is to do what he can to get us working again. He instead is focused on Universal Health Care – rather than helping business (especially small business) get hiring again. Instead he is so anti-capitalist that it is beneath him.
    2. States have options. Oregon has a pool that one can join after one’s COBRA ran out. It is reasonably priced and does not cost the STATE a penny. Iowa has a similar plan, check your state.
    3. The President has FAILED to sell his plan. He reminds me of the game TABOO. He can’t explain it because he is so busy figuring out what facets he does not DARE say. So he stumbles and stammers.
    4. It boils down to trust. We don’t trust Obama. We don’t trust Pelosi. We don’t trust the Democrats. And they are proving us right in not trusting them every day.

  31. #31
    On September 18th, 2009 at 7:14 pm, Papa Louie said:

    Red State Skeptic said:

    On September 18th, 2009 at 4:16 pm, chapoutier said:

    No one who watches that fairly could say he was laughing at people losing their jobs.

    I’ll have take it up with the Fairly Police. I took it as a jab that if you’re out of work, chuckle, of course you don’t have healthcare. Which to reiterate is I think a pretty typical attitude of Republicans.

    You’d have to have the “typical attitude” of a Democrat or be a total idiot to think he was laughing at people who have lost their jobs. His Chuckle was aimed at Obama and Democrats like you who fail to understand that unemployment is the problem. You fix that and you also fix the reason why most people are losing their health care.

    Obama’s agenda, from government run health care to Cap and Trade, will hurt the economy and put more people out of work. If your party really wants to help people, shouldn’t their first priority be to improve the economy and put people back to work? Putting people back to work one Czar at a time just isn’t going to cut it.

  32. #32
    On September 18th, 2009 at 8:05 pm, Papa Louie said:

    Red State Skeptic said:

    (Plus I know we’re supposed to be tolerant of everyone, but can’t we draw the line at Mormons? … Come on, just say no to these bastards.)

    But Red, whenever we try to say no to that Mormon bast*rd Harry Reid and his liberal agenda you are one of the first to condemn us. So despite your hate speech, you do seem to have tolerance for some Mormons — if they support a leftist agenda.

    The Republican Party does not have a monopoly on bigots as your posts clearly prove. Democrats claim to be tolerant but they are the least tolerant. If a democrat dislikes someone or some group, all they have to do is pin a label on them like “racist” or “hater” or “extremist”. Then they feel justified to hate them and ridcule them and discriminate against them. And it doesn’t matter if the label is fair or accurate. Once the label is attached to someone, they’re fair game.

    You fool yourself if you think you’re more tolerant.

    I don’t believe that any society has ever gotten more tolerant. They just change targets.
    — Glenn Beck (another one of those Mormon Bast*rds)

  33. #33
    On September 18th, 2009 at 10:39 pm, kayfromcarroll said:

    I have a few problems here….

    Where are all the Smart Girls tonight? RSS has hijacked this thread and has done nothing but insult our hostess and other posters.

    I forget her name (Stacey or something) that started the first “Tea Party” in Seattle. She’s my hero!!

    I was on MM the night she posted that she had just sent out the e-mails and got the permit. I loved it! Go figure that some MAN in Chicago borrowed the idea, and got all the credit.

    We need to impress upon the Republican Party to close the primaries. Or threaten to leave the Party if they choose to ignore us.

    A woman started to Modern Day Tea Party, we WOMEN can influence the direction we conservatives choose to turn.

    Who will join me in contacting the GOP about closing the primaries?

    http://www.gop.com

  34. #34
    On September 19th, 2009 at 9:22 am, gunslingerpatriot said:

    Folks, it hasn’t been said in awhile and this is for the newbies that have begun posting here: Don’t Feed the Trolls!

    GSP
    :)

  35. #35
    On September 19th, 2009 at 9:56 am, TigerLady said:

    I guess I’m a little old fashioned but I’m wondering how RSS thinks he’s gonna buy insurance if he doesn’t have money. Oh, wait. That’s why voting Dem is all about.

    Getting something “free” off of another man’s work.

  36. #36
    On September 19th, 2009 at 10:13 am, cheapseat said:

    rss; i’ll say the politically incorrect. i am pleased to see over ten percent unemployment in this country, because it will hasten the day when our bleeding heart do gooders are banished from our shores. the reasons for the high unemployment are twofold, gubmint regulations which force business to jump through hoops every day to just provide jobs for our litigious high school dropouts and graduates, and unions who protect them from the fate they deserve. so just as it isn’t worth fighting city hall to defend your home against marauding gangs of minority yutes, so you move, businesses can’t fight city hall over marauding gangs of seiu thugs, so they move. the companies survive of course, but the employees are now unemployed. and as i have always said, those grand bleeding heart hospitals and universities which can’t move to china or mexico, just import those slaves from those places and keep up the smiley face facade of a good american employer. you can’t swing a dead cat at any university medical school and not hit 10 oriental post docs and students. why? americans don’t want the doctor jobs and the researcher jobs?

  37. #37
    On September 19th, 2009 at 10:55 am, zyzzyg said:

    I hope they address farm subsidies, funding of regional airports, Congressional Junkets, Contractors, and federal dollars given to Catholic charities.

  38. #38
    On September 19th, 2009 at 11:41 am, Illbay said:

    The arguments about “affordable health insurance” are moot. I question your fundamental assumptions.

    Why do we have to have “health insurance” of the type we now have, beyond “major medical” for extraordinary situations such as surgery? The answer, in part, is because of the government interference in the health care sector that dates back to Medicare and Medicaid.

    You don’t have to have “grocery insurance” for the routine and inevitable need to buy food, and you don’t have to have “water insurance” to make sure that you have water to drink. So why “health insurance?”

    If people like RSS would ever drop the party line and start questioning the things they just assume WITHOUT question right now, they might be surprised to see their paradigms shifting a bit.

    I have this funky daydream about a Congress that says “okay, we’re going to try an all-free market approach to things right now. We’re going to repeal all the government mandates and roadblocks to health care, and see what happens. Hey, we can always put them back in place if it doesn’t work, right? Let’s try an experiment to see what really works.”

    But you’ll never hear that in reality, because with politicians it has NEVER been about “what works,” but rather “what increases our power and importance.”

  39. #39
    On September 19th, 2009 at 12:51 pm, WarEagle82 said:

    Who said:

    And of fatal tendency…to put, in the place of the delegated will of
    the Nation, the will of a party; – often a small but artful and
    enterprising minority…

    They are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent
    engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be
    enabled to subvert the Power of the People and to usurp for the
    themselves the reins of Government;

    Does it sound like someone has anticipated our current woeful situation?

  40. #40
    On September 19th, 2009 at 2:49 pm, ThackerAgency said:

    sounds sexist/ Jim Crow-ish

    and possibly discriminatory against dumb girls.

  41. #41
    On September 20th, 2009 at 7:21 pm, olbroad said:

    *ignoring trolls*

    Just wanted to thank you, Michelle, for helping to make the FIRST (of many, I hope) SGP summit such a success!

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Mudville Gazette

» New Standards in Journalism
Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook