Tea Parties Steeped in Insanity?

For decades now, but especially since the 60’s there has been a concerted effort to undermine the principles of minimal government and individual responsibility that this nation was absolutely undeniably founded on and which also made it in less than 200 years the most prosperous and powerful in human history.

Both parties have been culpable in this. Anybody who views this as an anti Obama crusade has missed everything. Obama is just the latest and most blatant chapter in the destruction of everything that made this country great.
there have been legislators at least as bad as him forever. Aside from still flying the Stars and Stripes this is not the United States of America any more. It’s heartbreaking and infuriating to live through. We are doing to ourselves what no foreign enemy could have accomplished.

Having said all that I doubt if these tea parties will come to anything significant. I fear it’s too late. The propaganda centers loosely labeled universities in this country are churning out brainwashed drones in legions every year. The next generation of power will almost certainly be the final grotesque death of what was once the freest land on Earth.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Uh, If you think 3% from millionaires is going to pay for his budget you need to go back to elementary school and learn your numbers again. Higher taxes are coming.

I see it not as a republican display, but a display by actual conservatives disenfranchised by the republican party.

It’s funny that it has gotten so big the media can’t ignore it, so they are now attacking it. If it were any other disenfranchised group the media would make them out as heroes. But apparently protesting is only good if you’re a liberal.[/quote]

True, I don’t know how people ever bought the crap of the top 3%. fools.

Even if that is true, this is where investment capital comes from, rich guys. not through taxation, which is redistribution of wealth, but actual market stuff. Imagine that.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
For decades now, but especially since the 60’s there has been a concerted effort to undermine the principles of minimal government and individual responsibility that this nation was absolutely undeniably founded on and which also made it in less than 200 years the most prosperous and powerful in human history.

Both parties have been culpable in this. Anybody who views this as an anti Obama crusade has missed everything. Obama is just the latest and most blatant chapter in the destruction of everything that made this country great.
there have been legislators at least as bad as him forever. Aside from still flying the Stars and Stripes this is not the United States of America any more. It’s heartbreaking and infuriating to live through. We are doing to ourselves what no foreign enemy could have accomplished.

Having said all that I doubt if these tea parties will come to anything significant. I fear it’s too late. The propaganda centers loosely labeled universities in this country are churning out brainwashed drones in legions every year. The next generation of power will almost certainly be the final grotesque death of what was once the freest land on Earth.[/quote]

All true, but there are thinkers out there yet. Drones start paying a few taxes and things look different.

[quote]jawara wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
So, you guys like these? Did anyone attend? They’re not just raving loons talking shouting about how much they hate Obama?

Ever been to an Iraq war protest? I hear plenty of people screaming about how Bush is equivalent to Hitler. Just because a group has some crazies doesn’t make the entire ideal false or morally unjust.

Whats funny about that is the BHO’s social ideals match Hitlers more than Bush’s. Hitler wanted government control of the banks too…[/quote]

Liberals have thrown out the Nazi label for years Jawara. what most don’t realize is what you said is true. Every communist government, Nazi government, totalitarian government has much more in common with liberalism than conservatism.

In 1968 we passed a big gun control law. The gun Control Act of 1968. this law was a word for word translation of the Nazi weapons act from the 1920s. the only difference was literally a few words. Senator Dodd a democrat from Connecticut was in possession of the Nazi law.

This is no BS, I did have a copy of both laws with a side by side translation. Now explain how the liberals are the party of tolerance when they must copy laws from one of the most murderous and oppressive regimes ever?

[quote]jawara wrote:
Somthing interesting I just found out about some of CNN’s coverage of the Tea Party.I heard a sound byte talking about how their were no “brown” people there. About ten mins later I saw some coverage of it on a local news station and they showed a hispanic guy throwing boxes of “tea” into Lake Michigan. Once again fuck the MSM.[/quote]

The wife and noted the same thing at the Alamo. Michael Savage was discussing it and asked the question

“Who is paying the income taxes?”

The government won’t publish data on income tax payer burden by race, but…

When you look at income by household, 85% of the households in the top 40% are white according to 2005 US Census data.

http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032005/hhinc/new05_000.htm

Then consider that the top 50% of income earners pay 97% of income tax

http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=133521,00.html

Granted, the stats don’t line up perfectly (40% on the racial stat and 50% on the tax stat), but it doesn’t take a genius to figure that of those who pay about 90% of the income taxes, 85% of them are white. So it does not surprise me that most of those protesting are white.

The bottom line is all people should get on board with this, regardless of race, because we are all on a sinking ship if it doesn’t change.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
So, you guys like these? Did anyone attend? They’re not just raving loons talking shouting about how much they hate Obama?

Ever been to an Iraq war protest? I hear plenty of people screaming about how Bush is equivalent to Hitler. Just because a group has some crazies doesn’t make the entire ideal false or morally unjust.[/quote]

Why do people who organize peaceful protests automatically be branded crazy?

BTW, was there any violence? Nobody seemed to get their panties in a wad about the G20 protest which were violent.

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
to be honost and rhetoric aside. trying to save home owners is not about letting us pay for other “dead beats” ect.

if foreclosures get out of control, that fucks all our property values, even at the current value which is deflated from two years ago.
[/quote]
That’s the whole point of a correction. Sure it’s painful for awhile, but artificially holding values up to some arbitrary number doesn’t do anyone any good in the long run.

Like anything else, don’t sell low. Should the feds try and keep other values up artificially? Stocks? Cars? Labor?

[quote]
how ever i do see the credence in opposing the attempt to do so. but you just have to consider how far down is the bottom? if you think its not very far, then protecting foreclosures is not the way to go. [/quote]

It may be very far down. Truth is no one knows the market-clearing price. What we do know is we will get there one way or another. Protecting home values, with the same tactics used to artificailly inflate them and cause this mess in the first place, is not the answer.

What we are seeing is a classic example of a speculative bubble. Housing prices should not stay at peak levels. This is simply not what they are worth. I owe more on my house now than I could sell it for. I am not concerned, as I don’t plan to sell. If I have to sell, so be it. I made quite a bit of money off the last two homes we lived in. That’s life and this is no different than any other investment risk. Plus there are plenty of other properties at much lower price.

Speculation got us into this and it is the only way out. People have to buy up available properties for things to get back to normal. As long as the fed keeps fucking around, it will be near impossible to accurately speculate on the right time to buy. If you leave the process to the free market, signals needed for speculation will be much more clear. Speculators will know the singals they are seeing are true market signals, not fucked up scrambled signals that could mean anything

If yesterday’s “tea parties” had been Iraq war protests, the Boston Globe (our main paper) would have covered both rallies (one in front of the State House on the Boston Common; one on the waterfront at Columbus Park.) There is no doubt about that.

Tea Party organizers contacted the Globe WEEKS before and were simply stonewalled.

People of ALL political parties should be outraged at that sort of thing.

Years ago there was a second amendment rally in Washington, D.C. My buddy noticed very few police officers. He was hard pressed to find them. He did talk to one cop and the guy told him that they knew there wouldn’t be any problems with this crowd.

It’s not really about taxes. It’s about a continuation (and in fact tenfold increase) in the reckless spending of the last 8 years. Spending that is not reasonably calculated and part of a well-thought out program to stimulate the economy.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view/2009_04_17_Tea_Party_won_t_end:_Our_cup_runneth_over/

If Obama was the King of England the media wouldn’t have covered the revolution.

I was at the one in St. Paul. As expected it was misreported in BOTH twin cities papers and also on the tv media. I personally went because:

  1. I was against the bailouts from the beginning.
  2. I have always found a way to support my family-even in bad times-I don’t expect any handouts from the gov. and really don’t want to pay for others foolishness, living beyond means, etc.
  3. I see our great country getting closer and closer to socialism.
  4. Tired of the so called msm and the leftist lies being permeated night after night.

I have no problem helping the helpless, but I do have a problem funding the foolish just so they can turn around and do it again.

btw-good article hedo. I predict this is going to continue to grow as more and more people get fed up with the msm and runaway spending. It’s no wonder nyt and their kind are going under (next we’ll be asked to bail them out) and msnbc and cnn are getting pounded in the ratings by fox every night.

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
So, you guys like these? Did anyone attend? They’re not just raving loons talking shouting about how much they hate Obama? [/quote]

I went to one near Palm Springs. Nobody was a loony, except for some guys, holding a video cam like a weapon and wearing infowars.com shirts.

It was really a celebration of the positive aspects of American life, for example, marines were honored, so were 9/11 victims, and there were talks of how we can make this country better. No Obama-hatin’, not that there’s anything wrong with that.

[quote]pat wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
So, you guys like these? Did anyone attend? They’re not just raving loons talking shouting about how much they hate Obama?

Ever been to an Iraq war protest? I hear plenty of people screaming about how Bush is equivalent to Hitler. Just because a group has some crazies doesn’t make the entire ideal false or morally unjust.

Why do people who organize peaceful protests automatically be branded crazy?

[/quote]

We all know that the word is “hopelessly naive”!

Um, two words.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
It’s not really about taxes. It’s about a continuation (and in fact tenfold increase) in the reckless spending of the last 8 years. Spending that is not reasonably calculated and part of a well-thought out program to stimulate the economy. [/quote]

Try the last 50 years.

Spending that stimulates the economy comes from private citizens acting in the best interests of the people they’re responsible for. Top down “stimulus” is a neato term for surrender of freedoms and statist dependency. The very things we fought a protracted cold war to defeat.

If DC wanted to fix the economy they’d get the hell outta the way, but that’s what they’re about.

The American Conservative’s Daniel McCarthy has a good post on the tea parties:

"I agree with Ross Douthat about one thing: the tea parties resemble the antiwar protests of 2002-2003. But that?s not a good thing. Douthat correctly points out that the antiwar marches were probably counterproductive, boosting support for Republican hawks in the 2002 midterms and 2004 presidential election. (The American people don?t like prolonged wars, as polling figures for the Korean, Vietnam, and Iraq conflicts demonstrate. But as the ghost of Richard Nixon could tell you, one thing Americans like less than open-ended wars is disruption in the streets.) The tea parties risk ghettoizing anti-tax sentiment.

The antiwar example should give serious small government people pause for another reason as well: the highly emotional antiwar movement from the start blended its principled anti-imperialism with ideologically partisan opposition to Bush and the GOP. As a result, once the public?s antiwar sentiment came to the fore in the 2006 and 2008 elections, Democrats reaped the rewards. But the Democrats, many of whom voted for the Iraq War in the first place, have pursued policies little different from those of the Republican since coming to power in Congress and the White House. We?re still in Iraq and may be no closer to leaving Mesopotamia today than we were to leaving Indochina in 1969. Obama has escalated the conflict in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Yet because the antiwar movement mixed its cause with simple opposition to Bush and the Republicans, many quondam critics of the war are now staunch Obama supporters. (See Justin Raimondo for more on this.)

Already the tea party protests have begun to follow the same path, being as much anti-liberal and anti-CNN as anti-tax and anti-spending. The problem here is not that liberals and Democrats aren?t bad and shouldn?t be opposed, but that one must be careful that in opposing them one does not overlook the crimes of the Republicans and the budget-busting militarists of the conservative movement.

There?s a deeper defect inherent in the politics of protest. Not only does it a.) often alienate the non-protesting public and b.) encourage a crude right-against-left polarization that masks the real extent of the problem (i.e., that most Democratic pols are also militarists and most Republicans are also big-time deficit spenders), but protest populism also substitutes emotions (especially rage) and symbolism for thought and effective political action. Notice that the neoconservatives of PNAC hardly ever waste their time with street theater. Instead they corral funding and work to shape policy regardless of who is in office.

Having the right emotional response to war or taxes is not enough. You must also know how the world works and how you can change it ? or prevent others from changing it around you. Broad emotional responses cannot make necessary critical distinctions between, say, opposing war and opposing Republicans, or supporting Ron Paul and supporting Rick Perry, both of whom may say things that hit the right emotional buttons, but who stand for very different philosophies and policies.

There is a reason why the scoundrels of Fox News and talk radio and the neocons in the press can get behind the tea parties. The reason is that these protests pose no threat to the Republican and neocon establishment ? they are thoroughly tame and impotent diversions of populism. They reinforce the power of the establishment by redirecting popular discontent into mere sound and fury. If the Right had learned anything at all from the Bush years, it should have learned that neoconservative and Republican elites are adept at manipulating emotional populists ? proud patriots, heart-on-the-sleeve social cons, enthusiastic Christians. And now people who are ?mad as hell? about economics are falling for the same trick. Get mad about busing ? and elect Richard Nixon. Get mad about abortion ? and elect George W. Bush. Get mad about the bailouts ? and fill in the blank. Any folksy-demeanored Republican hack who has mastered the Right?s talking points will do.

The grassroots do not lack intelligence. They?re plenty smart. But smart people who let their emotions do their thinking for them are like bulls before the matador. Rallies and emotional exercises have their place in politics ? but for too long the populist Right has mistaken such things for real power. The result has been exploding deficits, continual inflation by the Fed, and deaths of thousands of American troops overseas (to say nothing of the ?collateral damage? to civilian populations in the countries we attack ? hundreds of thousands of deaths, whole communities shattered). This must stop. Don?t get mad, fight smarter."

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2009/04/16/that-tea-is-spiked-with-kool-aid/#more-1707

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
The American Conservative’s Daniel McCarthy has a good post on the tea parties:

"I agree with Ross Douthat about one thing: the tea parties resemble the antiwar protests of 2002-2003. But that?s not a good thing. Douthat correctly points out that the antiwar marches were probably counterproductive, boosting support for Republican hawks in the 2002 midterms and 2004 presidential election. (The American people don?t like prolonged wars, as polling figures for the Korean, Vietnam, and Iraq conflicts demonstrate. But as the ghost of Richard Nixon could tell you, one thing Americans like less than open-ended wars is disruption in the streets.) The tea parties risk ghettoizing anti-tax sentiment.

The antiwar example should give serious small government people pause for another reason as well: the highly emotional antiwar movement from the start blended its principled anti-imperialism with ideologically partisan opposition to Bush and the GOP. As a result, once the public?s antiwar sentiment came to the fore in the 2006 and 2008 elections, Democrats reaped the rewards. But the Democrats, many of whom voted for the Iraq War in the first place, have pursued policies little different from those of the Republican since coming to power in Congress and the White House. We?re still in Iraq and may be no closer to leaving Mesopotamia today than we were to leaving Indochina in 1969. Obama has escalated the conflict in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Yet because the antiwar movement mixed its cause with simple opposition to Bush and the Republicans, many quondam critics of the war are now staunch Obama supporters. (See Justin Raimondo for more on this.)

Already the tea party protests have begun to follow the same path, being as much anti-liberal and anti-CNN as anti-tax and anti-spending. The problem here is not that liberals and Democrats aren?t bad and shouldn?t be opposed, but that one must be careful that in opposing them one does not overlook the crimes of the Republicans and the budget-busting militarists of the conservative movement.

There?s a deeper defect inherent in the politics of protest. Not only does it a.) often alienate the non-protesting public and b.) encourage a crude right-against-left polarization that masks the real extent of the problem (i.e., that most Democratic pols are also militarists and most Republicans are also big-time deficit spenders), but protest populism also substitutes emotions (especially rage) and symbolism for thought and effective political action. Notice that the neoconservatives of PNAC hardly ever waste their time with street theater. Instead they corral funding and work to shape policy regardless of who is in office.

Having the right emotional response to war or taxes is not enough. You must also know how the world works and how you can change it ? or prevent others from changing it around you. Broad emotional responses cannot make necessary critical distinctions between, say, opposing war and opposing Republicans, or supporting Ron Paul and supporting Rick Perry, both of whom may say things that hit the right emotional buttons, but who stand for very different philosophies and policies.

There is a reason why the scoundrels of Fox News and talk radio and the neocons in the press can get behind the tea parties. The reason is that these protests pose no threat to the Republican and neocon establishment ? they are thoroughly tame and impotent diversions of populism. They reinforce the power of the establishment by redirecting popular discontent into mere sound and fury. If the Right had learned anything at all from the Bush years, it should have learned that neoconservative and Republican elites are adept at manipulating emotional populists ? proud patriots, heart-on-the-sleeve social cons, enthusiastic Christians. And now people who are ?mad as hell? about economics are falling for the same trick. Get mad about busing ? and elect Richard Nixon. Get mad about abortion ? and elect George W. Bush. Get mad about the bailouts ? and fill in the blank. Any folksy-demeanored Republican hack who has mastered the Right?s talking points will do.

The grassroots do not lack intelligence. They?re plenty smart. But smart people who let their emotions do their thinking for them are like bulls before the matador. Rallies and emotional exercises have their place in politics ? but for too long the populist Right has mistaken such things for real power. The result has been exploding deficits, continual inflation by the Fed, and deaths of thousands of American troops overseas (to say nothing of the ?collateral damage? to civilian populations in the countries we attack ? hundreds of thousands of deaths, whole communities shattered). This must stop. Don?t get mad, fight smarter."

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2009/04/16/that-tea-is-spiked-with-kool-aid/#more-1707[/quote]

Good Article.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
<<< Having the right emotional response to war or taxes is not enough. >>>[/quote]

This idiotic statement right here discredited just about everything else this clown had to say.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
<<< Having the right emotional response to war or taxes is not enough. >>>

This idiotic statement right here discredited just about everything else this clown had to say.[/quote]

Care to elaborate?