Tea Party, Where's The Beef?

reply to post by passingthought


Wait a second, I'm a troll? I have my opinion and it is what it is, I'm not playing games, plus trolls are the ones that make lots of noise and become annoying, I left this thread because I hate bad tension and hate people that think that the more posts you make the better your argument. As far as the "kids drink", when people say your drinking the kool-aid they arn't referring to the simple delicious kids drink, they are referring to the Jonestown cult that literally drank the kool-aid and paid the price.

[edit on 18-4-2010 by Sheeper]

reply to post by Professor Tomorrow


Not complaining, I was just looking in from the outside. I may have been a lil brash, but that's how it sounded to me. This is what it is for, and I hope I contribute to the web based forum, just as any common man of woman. Just wish I got paid for it.. Mighta sounded trollish, but I kept it on topic, without much of a personal focus.. I just think complaining about assembly in America, is something in American, that should be taboo..

reply to post by iamcamouflage


I was dropping it just for this discussion only. All other post will be more in line with my avatar. If you cant find humor in the irony inherent in the current state of affairs, then all you have left is to cry.

Originally posted by Phedreus
Yes I do have knowledge of and experience with both the definition and implementation of Socialism. By definition, President Obama along with the current Congress, has finished what has been a slow decent towards Socialism by this country.

By what definition?

This country is a Socialist Nation. On the Cover of Newsweek several months back was a huge headline, “We are all Socialist Now” Now if you can’t trust Newsweek well I just don’t know what this world is coming to.

If you trust a sensationalist headline and a figure of speech to be the word of God, I just don't know who can help you. I mean, seriously, to construe the current cut-throat no-holds-barred capitalist nature of the United States as socialist is just unbelievable. You consider yourself an educated person, then please comment on this: do you or do you not agree that deliberate erosion of the provisions of Glass-Steagall act, which happened in the past 15 years, was the cornerstone of the monumental financial crisis we are still suffering from? I can spell it in one word: deregulation. Then again, did our "fascist-socialist" govt run background checks on people who were applying for mortgages? No, it was like Wild West -- anyone who can spell "ARM" could sign and get a loan.

Did our "socialist" government protect us against jobs being stolen from us that went overseas? No, that govt is strictly on the side of big business and did nothing to intervene. That's your ideal of a free country, I suppose.

Nothing is socialist in the US with one exception which is unemployment benefits. Without those this nation would quickly become a 3rd world kind of a place.

reply to post by buddhasystem


You seem to have trouble discerning statements of facts and opinions and satire.

Socialism is a philosophy that encompasses various theories of economic organization which advocate either public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] A more comprehensive definition of socialism is an economic system that directly maximizes use-values as opposed to exchange-values and has transcended commodity production and wage labor, along with a corresponding set of social and economic relations, including the organization of economic institutions and method of resource allocation;[4] often implying a method of compensation based on individual merit, the amount of labor expended or individual contribution.[5]

Socialists generally share the view that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and derives its wealth through a system of exploitation. This in turn creates an unequal society, that fails to provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximise their potential,[6] and does not utilise technology and resources to their maximum potential nor in the interests of the public.[7]

Seems to hit the nail on the head if you ask me.

The housing market went kaput because of the intervention of Barney Rubble, I mean Frank and his committee, and their community reinvestment act.

[edit on 4/19/2010 by Phedreus]

reply to post by Phedreus


You went to the trouble to insert a large portion of a Wikipedia article (I don't think you bothered to credit the source) -- however, if taken for the face value, this excerpt does absolutely nothing to support ANY of the views you presented in this thread, and especially that the US has become a socialist state or any such comparable piece of nonsense du jour.

reply to post by buddhasystem

I am not sure how much clearer I can be. Please excuse the lack of source I missed it with the copy; however you didn’t seem to have much trouble recognizing it. By definition, The US is a Socialist Nation it meets all requirments to be deemed Socialist. . By actions the US meets the criteria of a Socilist State, I list just a few that markedly make the point.

The take over and controlling ownership of GM, takeover of GM union pension fund and its problems with underfunding of the plan to the tune of 55% , Nullification of preferred stock and bond rights under the terms of purchase of those bonds, Nullification of voting rights and right to first payout guaranteed by the terms of the sale of said bonds.

Holding majority and minority shares in private financial institutions. Take over of the entire college loan program, take over and control of the majority of the mortgage industry. Confiscatory control of current loans on book with various private firms, to wit, the modification of loans, the curtailment of foreclosure proceedings, and even the outright nullification of loan agreements and total payout. The Appointment of Czars, with powers not given them by the Constitution or the advice or consent of the congress, and finally, the takeover of the healthcare industry and one third of the US economy.

I don’t want to hear this it started with Bush or that was not Clinton. It was the Federal Government. With the passage of Health care, President Obama has put the brand of Socialist squarely on the backs of America.

It is my personal belief that every political party has some good ideas. The problem I see with the TPM is that their constituency seems to be mostly split down the middle when ask about specific programs and legislation. The only issue that I see them 100% united in favor of is their hatred for president Obama and democratic party.

When he was running for presidency, all I heard from the opposition was how inexperienced Obama was and how he was unqualified to hold the office.

Then after he got elected, the TPM was born. According to them, Obama has managed to destroy our nation and instill socialism in a short 16 months time. Sounds like he's accomplished a lot for such an incapable man.

My point is that if you promote fear and hatred as a platform, then the fear and hatred you promote will undoubtably insure your failure.

How can you promote a candidate to run for government office when fear of government is your platform. A government that is Of, By and For The People is nothing to be feared. Upon reading it, one might notice that the word "shareholder" does not appear in this or any part of the U.S. constitution.

IMO, corporate influence over our politicians is the largest single destructive force within our nation at this time. Regardless of what the supreme court has ruled, corporations are not people as they are not born a live birth. No entity other than living individual voters should be able to lawfully lobby his/her representative on any specific issue. Campaign finance reform is a must and organized corporate lobbying needs to be completely outlawed.

It is my position that we need "Better Government" and not necessarily smaller government.

Even though I may agree in premiss with some of the TPM views, I could never actively support them because of the vagueness of their platform and their inability to condemn those who would promote violence. Promoting anything other than the strictest adherence to democratic principles is unacceptable.

If I were a union rep. charged with negotiating a contract with the employer, do you think that I could get my membership to vote for a new contract that included vague generalizations like, "we promise to pay you better and work you less," without including the specific wage rates and working schedule? Please! And how long do you think it would take for me to be arrested if I instructed my membership to go throw bricks through the windows of management?

If the TPM doesn't get serious soon, then they will not be able to be taken seriously anytime in the foreseeable future.

Just Saying!

to tea

[edit on 04/21/2010 by indigohazmat]

Originally posted by Phedreus
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I am not sure how much clearer I can be. Please excuse the lack of source I missed it with the copy; however you didn’t seem to have much trouble recognizing it. By definition, The US is a Socialist Nation it meets all requirments to be deemed Socialist. . By actions the US meets the criteria of a Socilist State, I list just a few that markedly make the point.

The take over and controlling ownership of GM, takeover of GM union pension fund and its problems with underfunding of the plan to the tune of 55% , Nullification of preferred stock and bond rights under the terms of purchase of those bonds, Nullification of voting rights

So you are saying that the US govt gave up voting rights, therefore electing to not govern in a socialist manner? I'm sorry but that's not just a gaping hole in your logic, - you plainly contradict yourself.

Holding majority and minority shares in private financial institutions.

From today's source:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The federal government took its first step towards unloading its remaining stake in Citigroup, unveiling plans Monday to sell up to 1.5 billion shares in the banking giant.

The U.S. government currently owns approximately 7.7 billion shares, or about a 27% stake in the New York City-based bank. A sale of the 1.5 billion shares would cut the government's holdings to just under 22%. The sale of the 1.5 billion shares would likely generate a return for American taxpayers, based on where Citi stock has been trading recently.

Selling the stock at Friday's closing price of $4.86 would lead to a profit of approximately $2.4 billion. The government converted its preferred-share stake into common stock when Citi shares were hovering at $3.25.

So the Fed is unwinding its position in Citi. Hardly sounds like a socialist thing to do!

Your assertations have no merit.