Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by blesscheese, Oct 17, 2013.
What a bunch of losers...
Do you mean they got the shutdown they wanted and failed to defund? Just asking because the post is vague.
I think fifty or a hundred years from now the Tea Party movement will be viewed much the way we currently see previous failed (and equally toxic) political movements, such as the CopperHeads or Know Nothings.
Lets be very clear about this: While they hide behind the image of brave and selfless freedom fighters mythologized by the Boston tea Party of 1773, they are in fact nothing of the sort. They are in essence a visceral and frightened reaction to inevitable changes in world business; society; and politics. And while virtually none of them has the courage to admit it, their very formation is an essentially racist reaction to the election of the first African-American President.
Lets also be very clear about this, if the events of the past two weeks haven't made it readily apparent: The Tea Party, and their idiot supporters, are a clear and present danger to the security of the United States. Far more so than that represented by the rump of al Quaeda, or any other Islamic fundamentalist group. We have just seen, thanks to the Tea Party, an act of political and economic terrorism without precedent in American history.
I think that's what the media and the government wanted us to believe when it was all said and done. I said in another thread that if I read between the lines and look at the powers that be (major banks), they were very active coming up on this new fiscal year. They met with the president, they portrayed the scenario very loudly that a shutdown, especially one past 17 October, would be devastating. So they laid the ammunition right out in the open for the world to see and the Tea Party just swept it up and used it as their battering ram, much to their own demise.
Any time something happens on a federal level the markets respond. Bankers are well aware of that. So they laid a case out there, but it was a case that was riddled with reverse psychology. "Don't do it or else..." And in came the Republicans to think they could use it as leverage. The markets responded, the stocks dropped, and every investor worth his or her salt went on a stock shopping spree. But the little guys who sold to protect their assets, many at a loss, were the ones who lost in the end. The big investors bought on sale and everyone else sold at a premium (loss). Once things stabilize the banks will once again have reaped a huge reward following the reaction to the trap they laid out so nicely. They probably high-five regularly in the boardrooms that stupid people never change and are quite predictable.
My thoughts are just a guess, but history tends to repeat itself. The Tea Party just earned some folks a lot of money...maybe by their own design? Maybe to them the political loss was worth the financial gain on the other end? I have no idea, but I think there's way more to it than just a racist political party and stupidity.
I almost believe this is the case. It doesn't take much digging before the whole Tea Party starts looking like a lot of very smart, very rich people playing an overly vocal and easily riled demographic to further their own ends.
"Hey, Bill. I've been looking at this ACA thing, and it's gonna cut into our bottom lines a bit. Profits will be down by at least 7%".
"Hmm. You're right. Wonder what we can do to cut this off at the source..."
"Hehe. I know how..."
TONIGHT ON THE CONSTITUTION TRUTH GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT NETWORK
Gay black liberal feminists plan to kill all unborn fetuses with death panels while the Jew-Muslim Agenda move forward on their plans to build mosques across the country in a blatant attempt to convert all Americans to Sharia Law.
WHY U TAKE AWAY MY RIGHTS, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA?
What is the purpose of this thread ?
Sorry, I did not mean to be vague. I just had no idea what exactly they wanted, and what they intended to accomplish.
From what I understand, (e.g., the comment of the Indiana congressman Stutzman that he didn't know what it was he or they wanted), they didn't know either. (I should dig up that comment, because it made me crack up).
But they got the Federal government to shut down for about a week. And what did they get in return?
Hello McFly, anybody home?
It's as if the mob walked into Congress and said, "Nice little country you've got here. We wouldn't want to see anything happen to it, would we?" If they demanded anything in return for not harming the government, we'd call the act extortion, the technique racketeering, and the law under which we'd prosecute it RICO. And yet, because these tea party guys are elected, god help us, they get a pass.
After careful thought and calculation...42.
The Tea Party is the most dangerous what you might call main stream political group because they are willing to push default to force an out come they feel strongly about, more than willing to jettison the tenants of democracy and ignore contrary opinions, and the majority to achieve their goals. The first step is willingly overseeing rules that hamstring the HoR. What is step 2- have the Speaker give a thumbs up or down for the entire group?
They have not raised arms yet, but from the passion expressed, I get a sensation some TP members are not that far from considering it. When someone has this kind of passion, they might imagine an emergency of such magnitude it's up to them to fix it by any means necessary. I'd be thrilled if I was completely wrong about my concern.
What basis are these procedural rules controlled by the Constitution if any?
Hummm....but yet our debt will continue to rise, unemployment is still high, people are still losing jobs or having hours cut, people participating in welfare programs are at astronomical levels today and you think the Tea Party are the terrorist?
And limiting government will not fix any of those problems so yuppers terriorists
There are many, many damning things you could lay at the feet of Tea Party at the moment, but even I think accusing them of engaging in terrorism is taking it a little too far.
Are they belligerent? Oh yes.
Petty? Most certainly.
Liars? Uh huh.
But are they terrorists? No. They're doing everything they can to game the system to their own advantage, but they're still playing squarely within the rules of the political game. The worst thing I can accuse them of and still feel honest about it is jingoism.
Let's not take this too far, people.
I found the quote :
When I first heard that, I my reaction was, "Wait, the only people who complain to me about 'being disrespected' are the prison inmates I work with. What's up with this dude complaining about 'being disrespected'?"
Let me remind you of some basic facts.
When George W. Bush took office in early 2001, the US Federal Budget was in surplus. There was serious talk in financial circles about what to do when there weren't US Bonds to invest in. Look it up if you don't believe me...
What happened? Answer:
1) Medicare Part D - which paid for drugs for Senior Citizens was introduced by Bush, albeit without any corresponding taxes to pay for it..
2) George W. Bush tax cuts further slash taxes on top incomes.
3) Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, which will ultimately cost $2 trillion+. Without any taxes to pay for it...
4) After 8 years of unsustainable efforts to prop up the US economy via a housing bubble, aided by deregulated finance industry - US market crashes, causing greatest recession in 70 years. Obviously further reducing Federal tax receipts..
If your precious Tea Party had raised a whimper back when George W. Bush was busy giving away the store, I might take you seriously. If your precious Tea Party had sent a couple of Tri-Corn wearing nimrods to bleat about civil liberties when Dick Cheney was ordering torture, renditions, and the erection of the largest domestic spying apparatus in history, I might take you seriously.
But your precious Tea Party was nowhere to be found.
Keep in mind that when GW Bush was president there wasn't a congress and he reigned with an iron fist without consulting anyone besides himself. Now that Obama is in charge we have a congress that has to pass his bills.
Have you...yeah...you've watched TV and read the news recently, right? I can't imagine anyone making a statement like this unless they've been under a rock for the past three weeks.
Ideology does have a way of shaping what one sees.
FWIW ... Congress during the G. W. Bush Administration ...
Bush was a dictator?
When he took office we were in a recession after the dot-com bubble burst.
...ending the recession, the economy grew for the next 6 years, and tax revenues grew.
...after terrorists attacked
...yet the Bush administration tried to regulate the housing industry in 2003.
That justifies Afghanistan. Iraq? Not so much.
..only took two post to bring racism into the thread
Play that race card, it's seem always to be your best move.
Just adding some needed context
I read this as heavy irony. If it is, it's good.
You don't have to apologise.
In 2009 when President Obama was inaugurated the yearly federal deficit was -$1.5 trillion dollars per year.
I know you "conservatives" like to blame that on Obama but the fact of the matter is that was the number when he entered office so obviously his policies didn't create that number.
Now, in 2013, nearly 5 years after Obama's inauguration, the yearly federal deficit is about -$760 billion a year. Yep, nearly cut in half in less than 5 years.
By 2017, when President Obama's term is up, projections say the yearly deficit will have been reduced to -$460 billion dollars. That's almost a 70% decrease.
Those numbers are straight from the White House and Congressional Budget Office. So essentially, President Obama's policies have already cut the yearly deficit in half and by the time he leaves office will have cut nearly 3/4 of the deficit from when he entered office.
Meanwhile both the stock market is higher than it's been and unemployment are the lowest it's been since Obama took office. All of this despite the Republicants obstructionist position of "no no no no no".
Terrorism is the use of threats or violence as a means for political gain. Threatening to tank your countries economy and run the entire country into the ground because you don't like a law that was legally passed by the majority is, by definition, terrorism.
This clip from The Newsroom seems appropriate for this thread.
lol. Conservatives attempts to deny that racism still exists in their party by claiming the democrats are "playing the race card" is hilarious.