reply to post by Misoir
Just as the Founders did prior to 1776, which was to appeal to the sanity of the Crown, to negotiate a peaceful means of understanding, so too has the
Tea Party Movement. Prior the the Revolution for Independence, the thirteen colonies had made every effort to negotiate equal and fair representation
in Parliament, but every effort was met with steadfast refusal. The colonies also believed they had the right to govern themselves, but this also was
rejected by the well documented Madness of King George, and by 1774 those thirteen colonies had established their own Provincial Congress and had
expelled all royal officials. It was the response of the Crown that dictated war and the eventual and inevitable Revolution that followed.
Great Britain responded to the American's attempts at self government by sending combat troops in order to impose their authority over the colonies,
and what began as an idea, turned into the bloody war that Great Britain demanded. This era of revolutionary ideas began around 1763 when Britain
began imposing a series of direct taxes and other intrusive laws upon the colonies, and since the colonies had no direct representation in Parliament
there was little they could do outside of flat out defiance except protest. With the establishment of their own First Continental Congress, and the
violence that erupted in Boston due to a blood thirsty royal military, in spite of the constant pleas by the First Continental Congress directly to
the Crown, to intervene on the colonists behalf, England's refusal to accommodate, led to the establishment of The Second Continental Congress and
The taxation without representation had continued to increase and by the time of the Stamp Act in 1765 the colonists were faced with their first
direct tax imposed by the Crown. After the Boston Tea Party of 1773, the British responded by passing a series of legislative acts that became known
as The Intolerable Acts. The first of these acts restricted town meetings in Massachusetts, the second act protected British soldiers from any legal
action by the colonies, and any British soldier to be tried for a crime would be tried in England, the third act closed the port of Boston, and the
final intolerable act by the Crown was the Quartering Act, where British troops were given the homes of Americans granted by royal governors without
any permission required by the owner of those homes.
Benjamin Franklin was at the forefront of the peaceful attempts to bring sanity and reason to an intolerable situation and went to England himself
where he appealed Parliament directly to repeal the Stamp Act, and yet Parliament stubbornly refused. Franklin's accomplishments as a diplomat are
well documented and not disputed, the diplomacy of one King George is not at all a part of history, and his and Parliaments arrogance ensured their
historical legacy of being the ones directly responsible for loosing control of the American colonies. They lost control by asserting far more
control than was ever prudent.
Just as the thirteen colonies had done in attempting to find some sort of peaceful revolution, so now the Tea Party Movement is doing the same. It
should be noted that where the colonists by and large revolted over direct taxes on the sale of certain goods such as stamps and tea, there was no
such thing as an income tax, and certainly not an income tax in perpetuity. The vast and varied members of today's Tea Party Movement began long
before there was even a Tea Party to begin with, and many conservatives had abandoned the Republican Party to join with the Libertarian Party in
protest to what was clearly a Republican Party who had long ago abandoned the republic in favor of political power.
While conservatives were leaving the Republican Party, both loyal members of that Republican Party and the Democratic Party watched the federal
government take the imprudent "war on drugs", an undeniable attack on the people to ever increasing levels, that has led to the imprisonment of more
people per capita than any other industrialized nation in the world, and accelerate this vicious attack on American people even more, and a gross show
of deadly and intimidating force with such violent and unnecessary acts such as Ruby Ridge, and Waco.
The Libertarian Party cemented its own doom as a political party by first demanding an oath of fealty from all its members, demanding all Libertarians
vote strictly along party lines, then failing miserably in offering any viable candidates that could be elected to office. The civil unrest that had
been increasingly growing each decade was culminating in a grass roots movement with out any organized name or party, but were simply people who were
rightfully appalled at the usurpation and unconstitutional acts of a federal government by all three branches that have clearly conspired to work
together in order to impose federal rule over the people, instead of working as a check on each other as was originally mandated by Constitution.
Thus, after 9/11 and the remarkably incompetent passage of the so called Patriot Act, where members of Congress openly admitted they had not even read
the bill before passing it, a Tea Party Movement began to gel, first in the efforts of anti-war protesters who came from both right and left wing
ideologies, and with each atrocity the federal government committed, these disparate and frustrated Americans began to recognize that the so called
two party system was a sham, and that the incumbents of Congress, and state legislatures had betrayed their constituents in favor of personal
The federal government of today has raided and arrested members of the Hutaree, not for any acts of violence or crimes committed but for suspicion of
crimes not yet committed, that all hinge on the word of a single government agent who had infiltrated the Hutaree and acted as a spy. Through the
courage of a single federal judge, and the clear and present, and indeed, gross incompetence of the prosecution, the obvious efforts at intimidation
by the federal government is only sparking more unrest, and doing little to convince Americans that they should mind their P's and Q's and just do
as their told.
Sycophants of government are everywhere denying that inalienable rights even exist, and insisting that any rights the people have are those rights the
government allows, while organizations such as The United Nations continually negotiate deals with corrupt politicians to continue the usurpations of
a Constitutionally established government in favor of some more insidious world government. The battle lines are clearly being drawn, and where
movements such as the Tea Party seek to find a peaceful way of returning this nation to the rule of law, where due process of law is once again
respected, sycophants of government such as the O.P. continue to bait and cajole and beg for war by calling everyday people who have done nothing more
than organize in ways to peacefully influence the political process as being insane.
In a day and age when the term "homegrown" terrorist is used to describe people who merely show up to protest, it is clear who the psychopathic fear
mongering advocates of violence are, and it sure as hell ain't the Tea Party members. These ruthless advocates of violence proudly declare
themselves socialists pretending their socialism is some sort of compassion when each day it becomes more clear that while they ignore all the violent
force the government has used to quell protest and the right to peaceably assemble and of the people to petition their government for a redress of
grievances, they also encourage that government to continue doing more to quell these rights simply so that they may have their own political ideology
imposed upon all Americans, and would demand we bow our heads in reverence and thank these benign socialists for their brutal compassion.
You want debate, O.P.? I stand ready to debate you and challenge you to support your assertions that a political party that has caused no violent
acts against either the people or the government are insane. Such violent rhetoric can have only one purpose, and that purpose is to incite the
violence you can not point to today. You want debate O.P.? Then defend the violent actions of government against its own people! Defend the
governments gross imprisonment of more people per capita than China has, or even the Soviet Union at the height of its tyranny, and while you're
defending these abhorrent acts against the Constitution those government officials swore an oath to uphold, while you're defending the intolerable
acts of violence committed by this government, explain to us how sane you are.
[edit on 6-6-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]