Tea Party, Where's The Beef?

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by mike_trivisonno

 

Hi Mike

Well, I took a bit of offense at you suggesting someone isn't bright when they question something...rarely do I see such comments on ATS, so I took the time to investigate who you are by your previous posts

I noted only 2 main themes. your absolute hatred of anything left of far right, calling everything a communist or communism.

I also noted a absolute reactionary hatred of equal measure towards anything muslim.

After about 15 minutes of me going from thread to thread you posted on, I concluded you have never offered any source material, never offered any thoughts to ponder on, just the two mindsets of irrational hatred of islam and the left.

I then noticed you some how, at this point in time, have a negative number of post points on ATS...I feel my 20k points are low, but hey...I often dont try...how the hell do you get negative points?

Anyhow, After long and careful deliberation, I have concluded that you have yet to offer anything to ATS, be it a new perspective, a source based introduction of thinking, or anything of value to progress a conversation. Congratulations...after a year online, you have made the 4th person on my ignore list...knowing full well that you will more than likely never add anything of value to either ATS or indeed the human race.

My advice to you, which will undoubtedly go ignored, would be the following:
Do not question the intellect of anyone whom asks a question as a line of defense...it makes you immediately suspect of the one unable to have articulate thinking to begin with and makes people whom enjoy progressive conversations immediately flag your comment as ignorant.

Until you get a few thousand points behind you, you really dont want to draw too much attention to your line of thinking...if you cant even make a positive contribution to ATS, then why would you in specific question other peoples intellect.

Anyhow, have a good day, and good rest of your life.

Actually if you look back at their posts you can see who the trolls are. People who defend the government don't have much that's sensible to say about it, so they call everybody stupid or ignorant. Obviously we don't know as much as you do. So have a good life. Do you know anything we don't know about the rest of our lives? Will they be short?

Originally posted by m khan
Actually if you look back at their posts you can see who the trolls are. People who defend the government don't have much that's sensible to say about it, so they call everybody stupid or ignorant. Obviously we don't know as much as you do. So have a good life. Do you know anything we don't know about the rest of our lives? Will they be short?

Oh, I look carefully. Anyone whom unquestioningly obeys the government is as useless as anyone whom blames every move our elected officals make as being something horrible.

I question Obama's stance on renewing the Patriot Act...that is not why I supported him
I question Obama's stance on ending no-bid contracts above $25,000

I look at the health care reform bill and wonder why it wasn't on cspan (even if nobody watched it). I know the excuse is that if its filmed, then the only thing that happens is endless political posturing, but thats what happened anyhow, but with the added bonus of a broken promise.

But for all the broken promises (currently 19 broken, 34 compromises), you got the other numbers...108 kept, 83 being filibustered, 257 in the works (to be filibustered no doubt..but filibuster does not equal broken promise...that is simply congress minority being obstructionists)

What I take issue with is the clear pushing of a lie or complete spin, fueled by lobbiests, injested by parasitical talking heads and spewed onto the 18% of people whom would rather listen to a comfortable lie than do research that either shows the truth, or shows the motive behind the spin.

To me, there seems to be two braindead factions involved...the pro-government on everything side that is basically cheerleading anything the government does, and the pro-corporatist side that cheerleads anything a lobbiest or wall street tycoon does.

Ultimately, if one must choose which devil to follow...the government is continously changing, the powerbase of corporations are almost eternal...better to prop up the ones that fall on a scheduled basis verses create emperors.

I am pro-capitalist...I find corporations are a destroyer of capitalism, but that is a discussion for another thread...to sum up the philosophy quickly, capitalism requires spending and continous influx to spread around a marketplace...corporatism is the collecting of assets and currency to dry up the marketplace for higher profit and value.

Unfortunately this has degraded a bit into name calling and non sense. I agree the 'Tea Party' are a bunch of grumpy republicans who are 'crying out' against taxes and 'injustice'.

Strange how these same people were the ones encourage Bush to go to war not once but twice, to approve the No Child Left Behind Act (a joke btw) and to slowly watch the economy tank while the rich got richer and the middle class got poorer.

Everyone i know involved in the Tea Party are poor, not very bright, thinks we found WMDs in Iraq and that Obama is muslim, or are exceptionally well off and hold college degrees and are mad that 'the little people' will be able to afford health care and they might have to pay a little more in taxes.

Thats a stereotype of course but thats what ive seen. Im sure i havent helped resolved the arguments but i figured id throw in my 2 cents

[edit on 17-4-2010 by truth?]

reply to post by ownbestenemy


Thanks for the reply to my thread and thanks for the advice regarding links. I knew that I should provide links but I'm kinda new to creating post and linking info, so I chose not to attempt it in my first thread. I chose instead to make an attempt to only state the least disputed figures I could think of, but your advice was dead on and I appreciate it.

Now I'm going to attempt to link some source information to answer the questions posted in your reply. This first link is from the Huffington Post and it pertains to the Lowering of taxes for 95% of americans. Hope I get this right.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

With regard to your assessment that future taxes must be raised in order to cover the cost of programs being enacted now, I couldn't disagree more.

IMO, what America really needs is "Better Government" which isn't necessarily smaller, just more cost efficient and the HCR bill is a perfect example of this process as it is projected, by the CBO, to save some 1.2 trillion over 20 yrs..

We can close corporate tax loopholes and discontinue corporate welfare. We could bring our troops home and demand that foreign allies do more to protect their own territories. We could eliminate the IRS and go to some sort of sales tax or value added tax system. I can't even begin to calculate the cost of maintaining the IRS, (it's offices and employees nationwide) when almost every state already has a state comptroller in place. I live in a city of less than 300,000 and we have 5 independent school districts each with their own administrative facilities and employees, explain that.

Any private business that operated with the duplicity of services employed by our government would undoubtably fail. The list of areas to reduce our governmental waist and fraud goes on and on. This is why I said that we need "Better Government."

Your assertion that medicare is not a mandate to purchase medical insurance somewhat confuses me. It seems that, even according to your own words, we are indeed mandated to purchase or pay for it, we're just not mandated to utilize the coverage afforded in doing so. I guess in one respect you are absolutely right, no one will ever force you to file a claim for medicare reimbursement of medical expenses, but why wouldn't you take advantage of something you've already paid for?

To get back to the point, we are indeed being taxed for medical coverage through medicare payroll taxes whether we utilize it's coverage or not. Just like S.S., some will pay their entire working careers just to die prior to becoming eligible for benefits.

With respect to what caused the recession and when it began, again I agree with your assertion that it began before G.W. Bush. I believe that it began when the republican party gained control of congress in 1994. I do however have a little video clip confirming that Barney Frank is, by no means, the biggest culprit responsible for causing the market crash.

www.youtube.com...

IMO, it had more to do with deregulation of the banking industry and the propagation of unsecured sub prime loans with escalating interest rates along with the fraudulent packaging of derivatives for sale to suckers worldwide. Some of the biggest crooks in America operate from Wall Street and it's high time they were held to account!





[edit on 17-4-2010 by Flatfish]

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Flatfish]

I think the tea party is getting a bad rap, it seems that attack is the order of the week @ this grass roots lil organization, and calling em biggots by some liberal media sorces, larry king live, real time on HBO, just for a few examples.. Its pretty amazing how liberals can explain with such clarity the reason all the angry white people in the streets asking for their country back has to do with African Americans.. I must give people to much credit these days..

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Bicent76]

reply to post by truth?


I have to disagree with your assessment of the Tea Party, just a little bit. IMO, most Tea Party participants are not poor and dumb but rather they are mostly upper middle class and well educated. The problem is that they are very poorly informed.

You see, there is a huge difference in being well educated and being well informed.

Just saying.

reply to post by Bicent76


"We Want Our Country Back" implies that they want it back like it was in the old days when white people ruled. Do you think we're stupid or what?

They never said they wanted it back when the republican party very nearly destroyed it. No, this call for the return of "Their Country" only began after November of 2008, what a coincidence.

Originally posted by Bicent76
I think the tea party is getting a bad rap, it seems that attack is the order of the week @ this grass roots lil organization, and calling em biggots by some liberal media sorces, larry king live, real time on HBO, just for a few examples.. Its pretty amazing how liberals can explain with such clarity the reason all the angry white people in the streets asking for their country back has to do with African Americans.. I must give people to much credit these days..

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Bicent76]

Im sorry but the the 'liberal media' automatically makes me want to disregard this. People who watch fox news still claim its a teeny weeny grass roots organization and that it has nothing to do with race. That the 'liberal media' is twisting the truth.

Im sure if someone could take a poll of how many members of the tea party are currently/previously/or know someone in 'the clan' a vast majority of the Tea Party movement would. Maybe you should bring up how fox news endorses them and treats them as the second comming of American Revolution. Glenn Beck will obviously be there George Washington as hes already compared himself to Lincoln and a host of other important historical america figures.

they have as much right as anyone else to hold demonstrations. it just sickens me that its ok for fox news and conservatives to support them, but if there was a hippy liberal movement fox news and republicans would be crying out constantly about hows horrible they are and how the liberal media supports them. It a double edged sword of hypocrisy

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I am pro-capitalist...I find corporations are a destroyer of capitalism, but that is a discussion for another thread...to sum up the philosophy quickly, capitalism requires spending and continous influx to spread around a marketplace...corporatism is the collecting of assets and currency to dry up the marketplace for higher profit and value.

Do you think Obama is pro capitalist? I see a lot of focus on the top 20% wage earners and not big corporations. I see a lot of promises to redistribute wealth without the need for those who will get it to actually work to earn it. Where do you think capitalism actually lives, in the bottom 50% wage earners or the upper 50%?

When the evil rich starts at 250k (and maybe next year that number might be 150k) for a couple this worries me, and this is not corporations.

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by truth?


Listen, friend. Have you ever been to a tea party gathering? Have you ever talked to anyone in the movement? Do you have even the tiniest shred of evidence beyond what you've seen on the television or in the internet to back up anything you're saying on this subject.

Let me pretend I'm you: "No, Professor. I'm just saying whatever it is that makes me feel the most righteous about my own position, while totally dehumanizing and parodying people who I perceive to be 'the opposition' with a bland assortment of MSM-generated hate memes."

Now let me pretend I'm me: "Truth? Buddy? You're going about this all wrong, because all you're doing is encouraging the real tea partiers to be ever more bold and assertive than they already are. The more ridiculously you characterize these people, the less they have to lose! This must be traumatic, friend, watching your entire false media paradigm withering in the sun. I have a solution: Put your mouth on a paper bag, breath slowly in and out, and never forget that November is coming!"

I'm glad we had this conversation, truth? Good luck and godspeed!

Originally posted by truth?
Unfortunately this has degraded a bit into name calling and non sense. I agree the 'Tea Party' are a bunch of grumpy republicans who are 'crying out' against taxes and 'injustice'.

Strange how these same people were the ones encourage Bush to go to war not once but twice, to approve the No Child Left Behind Act (a joke btw) and to slowly watch the economy tank while the rich got richer and the middle class got poorer.

If we look back a couple of years a number like 10 billion was big news and would hit the front page. Today we have been desensitized to barely care about 100s of billions and not until the word trillion do many even look. So at what point do things get out of control? We can bitch about Bush’s spending but when it pales in comparison (well add up ALL past president spending into one big lump and it still pales) to what we see today it is hard to relate it to anything in the past.

It is like you are saying that because last week you spent $100 on a dinner and I said nothing that I have no right to complain about the $50,000 you blow this week. The amounts are just ridiculous levels in comparison and that is what we are seeing with Obama today.

So what is so strange about it all? Do you make ten times what you made a few short years ago to pay for all this? I don't......


[edit on 17-4-2010 by Xtrozero]

Originally posted by Sheeper
reply to post by passingthought

 

Yeah......ok.
Wow, you've got to be od'ing on the kool-aid about now.

Well put. The syntax and structure you used in your argument have left me astounded, and speechless.

Hats off...

reply to post by passingthought


(One should not throw stones in glass internets, especially as far as grammar and syntax are concerned. Of course, I'm not releasing Sheeper on this one either. Both of you need to go to the woodshed, as far as writing conventional English goes.)

Hey, here's the Washington Post with a handy list of anti-tea party talking points! It's almost as if I've read them before somewhere...

reply to post by TXRabbit

We are tired of the Federal Government systematically seizing power from individuals and from the States of the Union and centralizing that usurped power into the hands of few political elites and their sycophants.

What are the bill numbers/congressional or presidential acts which have accomplished this? As hard as my primitive little brain works, I cannot seem to recall any changes to our political infrastructure which accomplishes this

I'd like to step in here for a moment, if you don't mind. Seems I recall a couple of recent examples:

o Obama fired the CEO of General Motors
www.suntimes.com...

If that isn't "systematically seizing power from individuals", then I don't know what is.

Under what law or section of the Constitution did Obama commit this act?

o GM Collapses Into Government's Arms
online.wsj.com...

General motors has become Government Motors, since the goverment now owns 60% of them.

If that isn't "centralizing that usurped power into the hands of few political elites and their sycophants", then I don't know what is.

Under what law or section of the Constitution did Obama commit this act?

I won't even get into how Obama sets salaries in the banking industry.

mike_trivisonno, sorry to jump in on your conversation...

ETA...TXRabbit, the last paragraph of your reply was totally uncalled for. You should be banned. Shame on you.

[edit on 17-4-2010 by mishigas]

reply to post by iamcamouflage

I would love to know what the Tea Party stands for and I want details. Please for the love of FSM, do not say "smaller govt" and "lower taxes". I want details!

You ask a lot of questions from the Tea Party. Questions that one might ask of an organized political party.

That is where you make your mistake. The Tea Party Movement is NOT a political party, contrary to the statement by the ill-informed member who called them the GOP.

So asking those types of questions will get you nowhere. The TPM doesn't even have a national leader.

When they say to you they want "smaller govt" and "lower taxes", take their word for it. That is part of what they want.

And they don't even owe you an explanation. Especially because all you would do with it is to tear it apart because of your leftwing partisan politics. You don't want to discuss, you want to argue.

reply to post by mishigas


For any movement to be taken seriously, they must first display some organizational skills and they must be able to develop some sort of a platform expressing their stance in a cohesive manner. And yes, they need a leader that can articulate their message to the general public.

Without any of these things in place, I can't see the Tea Party Movement going anywhere other than into obscurity.

The republican party laughed at Obama's community organizing skills in 2008 and where did that get them?

reply to post by Flatfish

For any movement to be taken seriously, they must first display some organizational skills and they must be able to develop some sort of a platform expressing their stance in a cohesive manner. And yes, they need a leader that can articulate their message to the general public.

Taken seriously? By whom? YOU? Believe me, Tea Party members couldn't care less about your opinion. You have shown in your short time in this thread that all you want to do is disparage the Tea Party, so forget you.

Without any of these things in place, I can't see the Tea Party Movement going anywhere other than into obscurity.

And I see them going to the most important place....the Ballot Box.

reply to post by Flatfish


Let me re-iterate:

We don't care what you old-think dinosaurs feel about us.

Hurts, don't it, being made irrelevant? I suggest you look into source criticism when evaluating the authoritative content of your information providers. It will help you get on some common ground where you're not just re-launching third party emotionally-charged salvos of propaganda. Then we can have a conversation.

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Professor Tomorrow]

reply to post by mishigas


To begin with I should inform you that I created this thread and it was my first here on ATS.

Next, the Tea Party should not be concerned with my obtaining my approval.

I am not the one with the power to enact the changes that they desire, even if I knew just what those changes were, which I don't. The only thing that I hear coming from their rallies are vague generalizations and hollow slogans.

That's the reason I created this thread in the first place, was to hopefully gain some insight with respect to specific changes that the Tea Party movement would endorse.

It's not enough just to say that, "I want smaller government" or "I want more freedoms" or "I want less spending and less taxes." What exactly would you cut in order to obtain these goals?

The Tea Party needs a platform expressing these specific goals or they can't be taken seriously by anyone who has a serious side.

I fully expect to see the Tea Party at the ballot box, but without a uniform message, I seriously doubt there ability to elect enough people of like mind to effect any real change in our government. Without a platform, you have no benchmark by which to determine if a candidate is like minded or not.

reply to post by Flatfish


You are like talking to a machine.

Learn to engage with people at the level of their actual premises instead of filibustering.