Why I dont buy the "tea party" protests

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Actually most of us conservatives, and who you would consider RIGHTYS, in your condescending tone, didnt agree with Bush spending

And yet you kept your mouths shut over the last 8years. Oh please tell me you were "different", it appears every conservative these days are trying to apply themselves as "different", it just doesnt account for history.

Two, spending isnt going to get us out of this slump, especially when they are printing so much money without anything to back it, any economist can tell you that.

The vast majority of economists agree that spending in the place of the lack of consumer spending is whats needed to keep the economy afloat until the consumer base can recover and start spending again. Like I said, if the president did nothing, who would fringers then blame? Please enlighten me, because it appears this arguement is a moot with you fellas.

You can also stop with blaming the previous administration all the time

Where did this mess begin? Who lied about the previous administration? Tell me how long has this current president been in office for? 4 months?

Of the 8 years this mess has been accumulating, 7 years and 8 months could be accounted for the previous administration. 6 years could be accounted for the conservative majority congress. Yet with these protests 99% of the blame appears to be put soley onto the lap of the president that has been in office for a mere 4 months. stop making excuses for the previous administration.

open your eyes

I prefer to keep my own eyes open in the real world.

I am so tired of hearing people like you deny the responsibility that Obama should be held accountable for his decisions.

What responsibility? The mans been in office for 4 months and yet you spend 100% of the time protestin and blaming him for something that accumulated years prior to him starting office. It will take atleast two years for anybody to start talking about him takin responsibility for anything.

Why dont you start taking responsibility for the previous administration because all I hear is the same old excuses and dodging of him having any hand in this mess.

SG

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


I would applaud the effort of Americans to try to get the government to listen to the people if it were not such an obvious tactic contrived and controlled by the same people that they claim to be against.

These groupings are just more proof of just how manipulated and controlled so many Americans are.

TPTB say jump; they ask how high and then brag about being ditto heads and race to climb on any bandwagon the MSM sets up for them.

It would be funny if were not so tragic.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
To curb the economic slump and to keep the nation afloat. If the government did not spend, the economy would collapse, then who would you blame then? Oh the liberal pinko president. The last president excessively spent tax payer money on imperialistic wars, and you had no issue with that, because he was a righty.

Hey, at least the defense industries are doing well.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
To fix up the mess as the result of the largest debt accumulation left by the previous administration.

Hang on, lemme get this straight. Obama is creating huge amounts of debt to help us with the debt from the other administration? Did he graduate from Econ 101, or just audited the class?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
You are all rightwing fringers, what can I say?

The protests were very telling... great to have good ol' newt and company... all the old neocon clan and fox news... all there with the elite to bring upon this "grassroot" movement. Just wonderful. Although it wasnt as big as I expected I admit...

How do you classify the people that were protesting Bush? Groups like "Code Pink"?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Religious cracks like to force their beliefs into law and onto others of difference views. People of faith only preach and practice their religion privately. There is a difference.

And they are all automatically religious cracks to you, right? That makes it easier to label them

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Well thats your opinion and Ill leave it to that. For me there needs to be spending in place of those that lack among the consumer population inorder for this nation to keep afloat. Everytime you invest in infrastructure you gain profit back. Id much rather have him take action then sit around.

Sitting around will help. I mean, it sure beats the pork in the plan that Obama just let slip by.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
It will be afew years before anybody can say anything for sure about the stimulus.

If we make it that long

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Lie. He said throughout primaries troop withdrawal by 2011 and he is yet to break any promise.

Opps: www.barackobama.com...

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Do you find an agressive dangerous approach more reliable?

Depends on who you're dealing with. I don't think giving pirates iPods would have gotten that Captain back.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Pritty sure us spending half of the worlds total military expenditure is enough.

I'll keep that in mind next time I get mortared.

Originally posted by jerico65
Hey, at least the defense industries are doing well.

What you mean the one which takes up half the worlds military expenditure? 3 times that of China, Russia and the UK combined, the one which we increased $1 trillion in expenditure over the last 8years? During this economic crises? The one that the Obama administration will be increasing by $15 billion? Try not to choke on that bluff of yours.

Obama is creating huge amount of debt to help us with the debt from the other administration?

The last administration left the largest debt of any administration in the history of these United states with the economic slump in the position it is. The consensus by the vast majority of economists is the need to spend in the place of consumers if the economy is to survive. The stimulus will pay itself off within a matter of years, so nobody can really talk for the moment. If Obama did nothing the economy would collapse totally then government would then be relied upon for assistance... which would then cost billions in anycase, which would by then have the president being blamed for not doing anything to prevent total collapse. As I said, the argument with you fellas is a moot.

Did he graduate from Econ 101

Do you have the standing against the general consensus among economists? or do you need the fringe blogs to tell you otherwise?

How do you classify the people that were protesting Bush?

Is this a joke? read the OP.... please, actually read it.

Originally posted by jerico65
And they are all automatically religious cracks

Yes, because thats what they are. You keep your religion in your back garden and out of the laws. By all means preach your ways, but keep your religion out of law... as the founding fathers intended.

Opps: www.barackobama.com...

You have to go all the way back to 2007? Through the primaries his been saying 2011, nothing different, and nobody here thought different. So you can cut the lame attempt to put it otherwise. If you can get me a speech where during the primaries he said anything before 2011, during the time in which folks were votin for him, then maybe Id take you seriously.

Depends on who you're dealing with. I don't think giving pirates iPods would have gotten that Captain back.

the captain was rescued, and it didnt involve any Ipods I assure you.


[edit on 16-4-2009 by Southern Guardian]

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
If you have a real life then get off the fear mongering fringe websites and get on with your life.

You mean like this one?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Im not the one going ape about "socialimisms". But please continue on with your hypocrisy. Again why are you avoiding the facts I put forward? Do the white nationalist have nothing to do with these protests? Do the neocons, the unconstitutional histories behind the politicians supporting this? they have nothing to do with tea party protests?

Probably anyone with a beef against the Government will be there. Or do we start limiting free speech, too?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
His not taking money from anybody. His changing the taxing structure as opposed to the flawed trickle down policy. But ya know the elites who most benefit from this sure love tricking you into thinking otherwise. You go have your socialmisms rant.

Well, I'm sure not seeing any money, that's for sure. Let me know how the socialism works out for you.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Stop labelling yourself. Get off the neocon mouth piece media outlets, stop holding their hands and protesting with them, then maybe you wont need to be labelled anything.

Really? I was labelling myself? And what was that label? Oh, I remember: Fringer!!!! The new call to arms of the left.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Then why defend their involvement in the protests? Why continously defend hannity's involvement in these tea party protests with his history? Why do you continue to ignore the anti-paulers who now act as if they give a damn now that a dem is in power? Why defend the very politicians than outright supported the war of lies and the patriot act? If you have nothing to do with them why hold their hands and the protests and why defend them?

Once again, I see you want to limit free speech. You don't like Hannity, fine. Or do you want to take it the next step and have the government shut him down?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
I get my news from a range sources. You welcome to look down the history of threads Iv posted. You however, as history shows, prefer to stick with the fringe websites.

Yeah, I bet. I thought Air America was off the air because they couldn't pay their bills?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Right, these protests and your little replies have nothing to do with hate. Sure. No continue to turn things around. Your still not doing anything to counter the OP.

All I see is your hate of anyone that has a word against Obama and his government.

Originally posted by jerico65
You mean like this one?

.

Why is ATS a blog? Or is it actually a conspiracy website, not one posing as anything else? What is ATS to you? to me its a place where you discuss things beyond general belief. Its not pretending to be factual necessarily, or that everything contained within it is factual. Its got a variety of forums to discuss within. It aint trying to fool anybody, although some members on here are.

Look I see your abit late replyin.... you had your chance then and you missed out.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Southern Guardian]

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Yes, because thats what they are. You keep your religion in your back garden and out of the laws. By all means preach your ways, but keep your religion out of law... as the founding fathers intended.

Well, last I checked, I wasn't planning on putting any of my religious views into the law.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
You have to go all the way back to 2007? Through the primaries his been saying 2011, nothing different, and nobody here thought different. So you can cut the lame attempt to put it otherwise. If you can get me a speech where during the primaries he said anything before 2011, during the time in which folks were votin for him, then maybe Id take you seriously.

Hey, Obama said it, not me. Like I said, guess some of the Generals in charge, that have actual combat experience, slapped some sense into him.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
the captain was rescued, and it didnt involve any Ipods I assure you.

Yeah, it was dealt with by a bullet in the head, they way it should have been.

Yeah, it was dealt with by a bullet in the head, they way it should have been.

And the same tactic should be applied to actual nations? Put a bullet to their heads? So by your logic we should invade every nation and put a bullet to every leaders head? This worked in Iraq right Are you serious? Is this the logic you really agree with. Im not going to even continue this argument with you... you seriously just lost me there.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
What you mean the one which takes up half the worlds military expenditure? 3 times that of China, Russia and the UK combined, the one which we increased $1 trillion in expenditure over the last 8years? During this economic crises? The one that the Obama administration will be increasing by $15 billion? Try not to choke on that bluff of yours.

Since I'm on the receiving end of the defense goodness, I really don't have a problem with it all.

Actually, a butt load of fat can be trimmed from the military budget. And the budget did increase since we are at war, if I do remember correctly.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
The last administration left the largest debt of any administration in the history of these United states with the economic slump in the position it is. The consensus by the vast majority of economists is the need to spend in the place of consumers if the economy is to survive. The stimulus will pay itself off within a matter of years, so nobody can really talk for the moment. If Obama did nothing the economy would collapse totally then government would then be relied upon for assistance... which would then cost billions in anycase, which would by then have the president being blamed for not doing anything to prevent total collapse. As I said, the argument with you fellas is a moot.

I'll keep that in mind. And Obama and the dems wouldn't be too heartbroken to have a nice nanny state to lord over.

And from what I read, the economic slump wasn't all Bush's fault. But he's blamed for it anyway.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Do you have the standing against the general consensus among economists? or do you need the fringe blogs to tell you otherwise?

Oh yeah, the "fringe blog" comeback. Very good. Think Obama has a freakin' clue about something called the Weimar Republic?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Is this a joke?

read the OP.... please, actually read it.

Nope, no joke. Tell me about Code Pink. They were quite vocal during the time Bush was in office. Guess you don't think they're fringers, huh?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
And the same tactic should be applied to actual nations? Put a bullet to their heads? So by your logic we should invade every nation and put a bullet to every leaders head? This worked in Iraq right

Are you serious? Is this the logic you really agree with. Im not going to even continue this argument with you... you seriously just lost me there.

And just where did I say that this course of action should be taken with foreign governments? Or did you forget that this was about pirates that captured a captain illegally on the high seas?

reply to post by Jenna


Very well said Jenna. It seems lately, that anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist. Also, anyone who watches Fox cable is some wacko, right wing conservative, or what ever. The liberal left continually tries to put anyone who disagrees with them in one category. I think this Tea party movement was more about the dissatisfaction with Washington, that some political party label. There are a lot of people mad, and if Washington ignores them too much, they will be making a big mistake.

Originally posted by mrpotatohead
Very well said Jenna. It seems lately, that anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist.

No thats not true obviously. Infact Iv hardly heard any accusations of racism here. Ill tell you one thing though, accusing the president of being a muslim because "he looks like one and has the name of one" certainly calls out intolerance and likewise by all means those individuals should be called out. Somebodies middle name or the way they look should not be a reason for them not to be president or not to be an american.

Also, anyone who watches Fox cable is some wacko, right wing conservative, or what ever. The liberal left continually tries to put anyone who disagrees with them in one category.

Well your kind of right. Anybody who watches fox news but proclaims they somehow stand for the constitution or they are not for partisan politics is a hypocrite and a wacko for believing they have any legitimacy in complaining about spending and corporations. Your were almost right.

I think this Tea party movement was more about the dissatisfaction with Washington,

Well yes, 95% of the folks there had some wacko conspiracy regarding the president.

There are a lot of people mad

Because righty is no longer in power and fox gave them a bone to pick.

and if Washington ignores them too much,

They should continue to do so, because in they/you choose to compromise, its damned if the president does, damned if he doesnt, and that they had 8years and lost their credibility in the process.

they will be making a big mistake.

The mistake was done by the very same individuals protesting. Their mistake was voting in an idiot 8years ago, twice. Liberals are once again having to clean it up.

i don't get this thread. this country has been a two-party system for a very long time, but people still act surprised that it is, and seem to have trouble accepting the fact that is

reply to post by Jenna


s4u

I was explaining to someone else in a different thread that the easiest way to criticize is to assume the object fits some made-up definition in your head -- your own personal boogeyman.

So, the OP assumes anyone who takes a position he disagrees with must be his boogeyman. This is shallow, misguided and ineffective.

Since I was old enough to vote, I have NEVER voted a "party line." I detest "lever pullers" as ignorant, lazy and oblivious. They are a commodity bought and sold by pollsters and parties.

I was raised with certain beliefs and values. No single party has ever supported all of them at any level; state, local, or national.

I am more fed up with this administration, and sooner, than any other I've seen. The hypocrisy alone is enough. Ideologically and politically, they are the most threatening to my values and beliefs. Ever.

I have always participated in politics at every level. I have friends in office at every level and am generally satisfied that they have remained true to their convictions. Often, that is the equivalent of the "voice in the wilderness."

Much of the genesis of our current problems (from my perspective) has been indifference, apathy and ignorance. I see the "Tea Party" movement as an opportunity to encourage education and participation in our government. It is, after all, "the people" who are the source of the power to govern.

A neanderthal rant, or MSM criticism of motive, is neither wise nor effective to people who understand the process and stakes.

The "Tea Party" movement is a challenge to the status quo. Nothing more or less. If you are happy with current developments and their future portent, then you will oppose it. If you are dissatisfied, it is an opportunity to connect and enable yourself to take a productive role.

Thank you for your insight and comment. At least I don't feel like that "voice in the wilderness" I was talking about.

Deny ignorance.

jw

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
No thats not true obviously. Infact Iv hardly heard any accusations of racism here.

Go have a look through any thread having to do with Obama since around September of last year and count how many times people are called racist for disagreeing with things Obama proposed. You may have missed them since you didn't sign up till February of this year, but I assure you that it has happened many a time to many a poster.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
The last administration left the largest debt of any administration in the history of these United states with the economic slump in the position it is.

So how long are you going to blame things on Bush before you start to realize that what Obama has managed to do so far hasn't really helped? What is the statute of limitations on blaming previous presidents? Does anyone know? Bush may not have been the greatest president in the history of our country, and he may not even be in the top 25, but he is no longer in office and you can only point the finger at him for so long before you have to take a look at who is currently holding the office. Creating more debt isn't the cure for debt. If you really think it is, I encourage you to try calling your creditors and telling them that you are going to pay them back by spending more. See what they tell you.

Originally posted by jdub297
So, the OP assumes anyone who takes a position he disagrees with must be his boogeyman.

You really think everybody at those protests have the histories to back themselves up regardining the constitution or bi-partisanship? Better yet heres another one, where did I say every single individual at those protests?

This is shallow, misguided and ineffective.

Ill tell ya what was ineffective, those protests. It really derailed the original Pauler message and what came of it was fox news and all of Bushes buddies at some neocon reunion fest trying in every way to pose as constitutionalists. Unbelievable.....

Since I was old enough to vote, I have NEVER voted a "party line."

This goes beyond party line, this goes into ideological lines as well.

The "Tea Party" movement is a challenge to the status quo.

From my view and the majority of americans all the tea party protests did was to put up a hissy fit about spending and socialimisms and then it died down so fast many were beginning to ask whether it had actually started already.

I love the new excuses being thrown around now for the faliure of this corporate fox sponsered "grassroots" movement.... "it was raining" "this is just the first stage" "there will be more people coming in tonight" "we were going to throw tea bags into the sea but we didnt have permission"

Here let me give you an example of your unsuccessful "successful" protest. 10,000 protested in st Louis for the Bushie reunions, 100,000 st louis folks showed up for their support of Obama last year. In total there was 340,000 protestors around the nation for these tea parties, Obamas support in st Louis, springfield Ill. and Virginia accounts for that number already.... alone. In Houston 10,000 showed up for the tea parties, Obama rallied 18,000 in Houston during february of last year. I could really keep on going with this.

You keep telling yourself anything you want. In about weeks time there will be something else you fellas will be bluffin bout.



[edit on 16-4-2009 by Southern Guardian]

Originally posted by Jenna
Go have a look through any thread having to do with Obama since around September of last year

I said in this thread.... you have to go back to last year over what one member said jeeze Jenna is this it? You folks go on about us always playing the race card, yet you cant account for it, all you can do is go to one odd thread last year. I never denied anybody among the Obama supporters who played the race card, however its true that conservatives and fringers here do the same. Nobody is innocent.

Now my comment were regarding this thread.... not some thread last year

So how long are you going to blame things on Bush before you start to realize that what Obama has managed to do so far hasn't really helped?

When Obama gets his term. Im saying round 2 years maybe... but Im sorry.... 4 months and your fellas are jumping the gun about the constitution? Yet I heard nothing from you folks during the Bush administration. tis tis.

What is the statute of limitations on blaming previous presidents?

Clearly yours is the minute a liberal gets into power. I think it comes down to common sense. A president starts his term under the worst economic crises in decades, he implements a policy that will take atleast two years for us to accuse anything of it, a president accused for increasing taxes when his lowering it, a president accused of being socialist when his merely changing the tax system not to only benefit the wealthy, when inevitably changing the tax system will be distributing wealth, however you position it. Its about common sense, not what limitation you set.

Bush may not have been the greatest president in the history of our country, and he may not even be in the top 25, but he is no longer in office

So then you can blame the mess that accumulated over the last 8years onto an administration barely 4 months into office? The worst one in decades? Really now Jenna.

Creating more debt isn't the cure for debt.

Post a thread of your own and we can have our debate there on that matter. For now your restricted to your view of things, not everybody elses, not the general consensus of economists.

SG

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Southern Guardian]

Originally posted by jdub297
So, the OP assumes anyone who takes a position he disagrees with must be his boogeyman. This is shallow, misguided and ineffective.

That is exactly what has happened. Disagree with a single point and you are automatically a right-winger, regardless of whether you truly are or not.

Much of the genesis of our current problems (from my perspective) has been indifference, apathy and ignorance. I see the "Tea Party" movement as an opportunity to encourage education and participation in our government. It is, after all, "the people" who are the source of the power to govern.

A neanderthal rant, or MSM criticism of motive, is neither wise nor effective to people who understand the process and stakes.

Agreed. Many people either didn't care or didn't realize what was going on with the country until fairly recently. But since they didn't wake up sooner, then they all must have agreed with everything Bush and his administration did. Never mind the fact that congress was controlled by the democrats at the end of Bush's last term, and that Bush himself didn't write any of the laws that were passed.

The "Tea Party" movement is a challenge to the status quo. Nothing more or less. If you are happy with current developments and their future portent, then you will oppose it. If you are dissatisfied, it is an opportunity to connect and enable yourself to take a productive role.

My only hope is that those who are dissatisfied continue to voice their discontent, preferably while staying as peaceful as they were during the tea parties, until the government finally listens or until enough members of congress are replaced that they have no choice but to listen. They are supposed to be representing the people, not their own interests or those of the corporations.

Thank you for your insight and comment. At least I don't feel like that "voice in the wilderness" I was talking about.

You are most assuredly not the only voice, we just aren't as loud as those who disagree with us until we reach our limit. I like to think we just have common sense and don't get up in arms about every little thing we dislike.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Jenna]