Why the Tea Party is Dangerous

By Mike Appleton (Guest Blogger)

In 1773 the British East India Company was broke.  In an effort to prevent bankruptcy, and the resulting loss of the crown’s investment, the British government eliminated all taxes on domestic tea sales and granted the company a monopoly on tea shipments to the American colonies.  In December of that year radicals boarded ships in Boston harbor and threw $75,000.00 worth of tea overboard.  The first Tea Party was a violent reaction to monopolistic economic power protected by government.

The modern Tea Party doesn’t understand history, so it can’t be expected to appreciate irony.  It is a mongrel movement, its leaders self-proclaimed, its agenda by turns unfathomable and incoherent, its philosophy grounded in vehemence.  So how can it possibly be dangerous?  Here, in no particular order, are my four Rs of the Tea Party.

1. It is racist.  I know.  I just played the race card.  But the best way to stop someone from playing the race card is to quit dealing it.  Public expressions of bigotry began as soon as Barack Obama was nominated at the Democratic convention, and continued throughout the campaign, during which prominent Republicans referred to him as “boy,” “uppity” and other vulgarities.  In short order he became a socialist and a Marxist and was then transformed into an extremist Arab Muslim.  Sarah Palin eventually settled on the euphemistic “let’s take our country back,” but we all knew what she meant.  The Tea Party began forming before the inauguration and was printing “Don’t Tread on Me” posters while the Obama family was still unpacking in the White House.  On April 15, 2009, the Tea Party was protesting a tax burden that was, and is, the lowest in 60 years.  

The Tea Party has promoted ugly forms of nativism, including punitive immigration laws,  English only legislation and bans on the teaching of ethnic studies.  It is the 1840s once again, but the targets are Muslims and Hispanics rather than Germans and Irish.

2.  It is a religionist movement.  I don’t know if religionism is a word, but I use it to describe a phenomenon distinct from traditional religion: religion as political philosophy.  It is the view that the Constitution was divinely inspired, that America is God’s gift to mankind, that capitalism is mandated by Holy Scripture and that the notion of “social justice” is the work of the Antichrist.  It is a culmination of the fundamentalist reaction in the early 1900s to Darwin and the progressive movement.  It has spawned a form of Christian imperialism that justifies the “crusades” in Iraq and Afghanistan, supports Israel uncritically and sends American politicians to Africa to lobby for the death penalty for homosexuals. 

3.  It is repressive.  The Tea Party is committed to authoritarianism.  Lawmakers in Congress and throughout the country, particularly in states with heavily Republican legislatures, have been imposing humiliating burdens on women’s constitutional rights at breakneck speed.  They are simultaneously reducing taxes on business  and cutting funding for education and health care.  The regulation of entire industries is being eliminated in certain states.  The integrity of public employees has been impugned and their rights to organize curtailed.  Laws banning the phony threat of sharia are pending in a dozen states.  The independence of the judiciary has been threatened by proposals to reduce courts’ rule-making authority and politicize the judicial selection process.

4.  It is revisionist.  The Christian right and its supporters in legislatures and on school boards have demanded that high school history texts be rewritten to eliminate references to the deism endorsed by many of the Founders in favor of promoting the false notion of America as an exclusively Christian nation.  The history of slavery and the Civil War is being falsified to satisfy the desires of apologists for the Confederacy and southern “values.”   Science cannot be re-written, but it can be denied.  The sciences of climate change and evolutionary processes have become the subjects of unnecessary controversy.

Robert La Follette, a founder of the progressive movement, became governor of Wisconsin in 1900 and immediately took on the railroads, forcing them to pay higher taxes on their assets.  When the new governor of Wisconsin took office this year, he immediately took on labor in an effort to destroy public employee unions and cover the cost of new tax reductions for business.  But like I said earlier.  People who don’t understand history can’t appreciate irony.

254 thoughts on “Why the Tea Party is Dangerous

  1. Mike A.
    Great article. You hit the nail on the head. They are trying to take us back to the days of LaFollete! Everyone also tries to hide from the fact that this group of old, rich white people(for the most part) are looking to save their almighty buck from the evil black man. You have exposed their excuses for issues, the high taxes, socialism, etc. Now, if we can only get the Left to fight these radicals head on, we might be ok.

  2. Mike A.,

    Where was the Tea Party when George Bush was in office? I’ve thought is was funny that these folks didn’t appear concerned about government taxes and spending until Obama became president.

  3. To your points . . .

    1. I concur without exception.

    2. I concur with a quibbling exception.

    Pardon me while I digress . . .

    Religionism wasn’t a word until just now. The traditionally accepted word would be theonomous – with practitioners of this the religiously based political philosophy being called theonomists or theocrats; those who desire to institute a form of government that is called theocratic or a theocracy. These terms traditionally apply to the attempts to apply Christian Biblical beliefs to government. Etymologically, the term theocracy comes from the Greek θεοκρατια meaning the “rule of God”, a term first used by Titus Flavius Josephus in discussing the histories of Israel and Judah.

    However, I think I like your newly coined term “religionism” for the very reason it is not rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition and has a universal application for the same essential idea: government by religious dogma. The Tea Baggers are certainly “religionists”, but a quick perusal of the papers show they are not the only religious traditions attempting to assert control or in some cases succeeding is asserting control over the mechanisms of government.

    Congratulations, Mike A.! It’s a noun! You should be a proud father at a moment like this.

    3) I concur without exception.

    4) I concur without exception.

    As always . . . well said, sir. Well said indeed.

  4. Elaine,

    Yes, I did. I’ll have to say I liked it although in general I find Bill Maher annoying. Funny, but annoying.

  5. Mike A

    it’s not that they don’t understand history, they just don’t believe it. if one of their pet politicians says something stupid about history, it doesn’t matter, fox won’t report it and they’ll never hear of it. ever try telling a teabagger that “in god we trust” has only been on currency since the civil war, or that “under god” has only been in the pledge of allegiance since the 1950’s, go ahead. they won’t believe you.

    so what if something is in the history books, they were wrote by secular, muslimist liberals.
    so what if it’s in the constitution, they have their own interpretion, and it says what they want to believe.

    just ask tootie

  6. Right around the time the Revolutionary War started many colonies had formed “Committees for Tarring and Feathering”. These Committees would investigate people whom they felt were hindering the drive for independence and … well … tar and feather them.

    I propose that we form a “Committee for Tarring and Feathering” party and go after the Teabaggers party. History answers history.

  7. Ron Paul anyone? There are poor elements to every collectivist group, to lump them all together and call them racist, revisionist, religious and repressive I think is a harsh generalization of some of the poor parts of the movement. Some great examples of the kind of people the tea party embodies are Judge Napolitano, Rand and Ron Paul, Jesse Ventura, Thomas Woods and many others. These people are hardly any of those things, and have great ideas on what the role of government should be.

  8. One minor quibble that puts a major change on the original tea party. England herself was going broke. The Crown had just fought a protracted war against France – here in the New World, for the benefit of the Colonialists. They had raised taxes in England quite a bit to pay for the war & now wanted the people who benefited from the war to pay for it too. Our founding fathers were shocked to think they should pay for something the government had done to benefit them! Since it also benefited the Crown they felt it should ALL be paid for by the Old World.

    Wanting something for nothing is a common theme with tea parties I guess.

  9. Mike

    Excellent piece. No quibbling.

    My sister and brother-in-law are teabaggers. They are mean-spirited Christians (religionist); paranoid gun owners who fell for the racists’ proclamation that a black President would begin immediately taking their guns (racist); don’t see [ignore] the connection between the Bush tax cuts, Bush’s TARP, Bush’s TSA, Bush wars, Bush’s borrowing, the Bush recession and our current debt and economic troubles (revisionist). And to fill out the last item, endorsing repression, they aided and abetted Ohio Gov. Kasich in the dissolution of public employee’s right in Ohio that our father worked for nearly 30 years as an AFSCME union leader to help establish in the state.

    They are typical examples of what makes up the teabagger nation, not Judge Napolitano or Jesse Ventura. These are the kinds of mean, easily manipulated people who are doing the bidding of millionaires (Dick Armey) and billionaires (Koch Bros., etal) against their own best interests. They are the 21st century John Birch Society and should be ignored as the Birchers were. They deserve no more than our contempt, our disdain and disgust. It appears to me the Republican Party has begun taking my last piece of advice more seriously these days.

  10. rcampbell,

    “They are the 21st century John Birch Society and should be ignored as the Birchers were. They deserve no more than our contempt, our disdain and disgust.”

    They should be ignored but the press and media love them–the same press and media who neglected to run stories about anti-war protests in the weeks prior to the beginning of our preemptive war against Iraq.

  11. Thanks for the link, Swarthmore mom.

    She should be fired.

    She is:
    -party central committee member
    -a Southern California Tea Party activist and Republican Psrty official

  12. On April 15, 2009, the Tea Party was protesting a tax burden that was, and is, the lowest in 60 years. ~Mike A.
    ——————————————————
    Is it really?
    I don’t think so.

    tax

    Definition
    A fee charged (“levied”) by a government on a product, income, or activity. If tax is levied directly on personal or corporate income, then it is a direct tax. If tax is levied on the price of a good or service, then it is called an indirect tax. The purpose of taxation is to finance government expenditure. One of the most important uses of taxes is to finance public goods and services, such as street lighting and street cleaning. Since public goods and services do not allow a non-payer to be excluded, or allow exclusion by a consumer, there cannot be a market in the good or service, and so they need to be provided by the government or a quasi-government agency, which tend to finance themselves largely through taxes.

    source:investorwords dotcom

    in·come/ˈinˌkəm/
    Noun: Money received, esp. on a regular basis, for work or through investments.

    http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p60-238.pdf
    the rising tide of poverty unfortunately does not agree with your statement Mike A.

    Income has stagnated while costs have risen all around in a proprietary fashion…in direct contradiction of ‘free market’ principles. Add to that wars and other events that have been staged deceptively and I would say that taxes are no longer an effective marker of anything. Look instead to the health and decline of the working class to see why people are so angry and in need of what the tea party is selling….

    Especially in light of the corporate tax loopholes … Trends are oft more important and speak louder than singular real time statistics. I am not a tea partier but I sure do hope that this ship can be floated off the rocks….

    I agree with the rest of your post….

  13. I just wanted to say that the part about irony is a good point. This failure to appreciate irony goes very deep nowadays, and the Tea Party people are one example, a seriously pathogenic manifestation.

  14. http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35728268/ns/today-books/

    Jesse Ventura claims gov’t involved in 9/11

    Chapter 12: What really happened on September 11?

    The incident: On September 11, 2001, four airplanes were hijacked on American soil and crashed into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania.

    The official word: The 19 hijackers were all fanatic Muslim terrorists linked to al-Qaeda and its ringleader, Osama bin Laden.

    My take: Our government engaged in a massive cover-up of what really happened, including its own ties to the hijackers. Unanswered questions remain about how the towers were brought down, and whether a plane really struck the Pentagon. The Bush Administration either knew about the plan and allowed it to proceed, or they had a hand in it themselves.

  15. “The taxes just since the Reagan days have lowered the tax bite on the upper income folks significantly, we are paying the lowest taxes in over 50 years. “~rafflaw
    ———————————————–
    well ya….and add up the loopholes for the corporations etc and what do you get? now add in the rising cost of living, the rising cost of betterment via education etc. and fees and sales tax and gas tax and tax tax and tax on assistance (thanks for the help….) and healthcare and what do you get?

    An amazing shift of burden…

    now rip the rug of justice out from under anybody that doesn’t care to sleep with thugs and crooks…

    and in a country whose most recent actions were more likely to protect thugs and monopolies?

    …no recourse….

  16. Dave Schuman
    1, April 18, 2011 at 5:24 am
    Ron Paul anyone? There are poor elements to every collectivist group, to lump them all together and call them racist, revisionist, religious and repressive I think is a harsh generalization of some of the poor parts of the movement. Some great examples of the kind of people the tea party embodies are Judge Napolitano, Rand and Ron Paul, Jesse Ventura, Thomas Woods and many others. These people are hardly any of those things, and have great ideas on what the role of government should be.

    =============================================

    The “Committees for Tarring and Feathering” will investigate and get back to you.

  17. Very good article, Mike.

    I posted similar sentiments in comment at Balkinization recently:

    “The so call tea party contradicts itself completely. The original Boston Tea Party protested against taxation without representation, while every single member of the Tea Party in the 50 States is fully represented at every level of our government that has the taxing power, local, state, and federal. The only unrepresented, taxed citizens are in DC. Yet the tea partiers in Congress led the charge against DC to impose new burdens, undemocratically. Hypocrites.”
    [at 9:58 PM]

    http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/04/barack-obama-as-colonial-master.html

  18. Mike A. everything you write is correct. The problem is who is and who isn’t included in supporting the value system of the tea party. What has happened in our nation is that people who consider themselves polar opposite of the tea parties, people who truly feel they are liberals, have come to believe in and support extreme right wing positions.

    Thus we have both mainstream Republicans and Democrats supporting racism in economic policy, in matters of war, in matters of immigration. Don’t believe me? Check out the effects of our economic policy on black and brown people. Black and Hispanic men and women have been hit even worse than poor white people due to economic policies supported by tea partiers as well as the current govt. Likewise check out what ICE has been up to. Lately, in addition to people dying in their “care” they have been stopping people in Detroit who are driving while Hispanic and asking them to show their birth certificates. Then there’s the question of religious wars against Muslims or brown people. It is well known that the current govt. encourages religion in the ranks of the military. That is top down, not bottom up. There is open talk of crusades. As JT noted in another thread, faith based initiatives are not simply the work of the tea party.

    Through propaganda people associate tea partiers and Republicans with all the bad policies you so well laid out. Through propaganda people do not associate these exact same policies with Democrats. However, if actions were what counted, people would oppose those actions when they occurred, not simply when they occurred in Republican/tea party circles. What has happened now is that many Democrats encourage and support their own leadership in the exact same actions as any tea partier would engage in.

    If actions could be seen for what they were, independent of party, I think we would see a more progressive society.

  19. … If actions were what counted, people would oppose those actions when they occurred, not simply when they occurred in Republican/tea party circles.

    You mean that individuals would think and act on real principles, and not find motive only in marginalizing and delegitimizing their political opponents?

  20. Jill,

    “What has happened in our nation is that people who consider themselves polar opposite of the tea parties, people who truly feel they are liberals, have come to believe in and support extreme right wing positions.”

    I consider myself a liberal–and I in no way support the same right wing positions that tea partiers do. Liberals like me still support social progarms such as Social Security and Medicare. We’d like to see a public option for health care insurance. We’d like to see better financial reform laws enacted and more regulation of big banks. We don’t want to get rid of the EPA. We’re anti-pollution and think that climate change is an issue that should be addressed. We aren’t anti-union–and we believe in collective bargaining for public and private sector workers. I could go on.

    I don’t know how you arrived at your conclusion–but saying it doesn’t make it so.

  21. Elaine,

    Do you think any people who consider themselves liberals support Obama and other Democrats? If you do then you must admit that people who think of themselves as liberals now support policies to the right of Ronald Regan. They support exactly the same policies as people in the tea party do– on racism, on the wars, on executive/police state powers, on religion etc. I gave examples of the policies embraced by Democrats in my original post.

    Liberal and conservative do not have the meaning they used to. That is how it is possible for people who call themselves liberals to support reactionary policies. It is why the tea party principles have credence in a wide circle in our society. Many people agree with tea party principles, both avowed tea partiers and people who think of themselves as liberals. If it were only a small percentage of people who believed and supported these principles, they would not be able to hold so much sway over our society.

    I am the same kind of liberal that you are–an old school, social justice liberal. But liberals aren’t a monolith. Other people who do call themselves liberals support unchecked presidential power to imprison, torture and kill Americans and others as well as all the things I pointed to in my original post. This cannot be denied. Actions are true. That is why I suggest everyone needs to quit looking at parties and start looking at actions. It is the only way to break through all the lies, the misinformation and start holding this govt. to account.

    Just to give one short example. During the Viet Nam war people who protested did not identify the Democratic party as the party of peace. “LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?” Today, the peace movement often identifies Democrats as the party of peace and Republicans as the party of war. Yet, reality shows us this is completely untrue. We need to return to this idea of looking strictly at actions, not party, then working from there.

  22. Jill Yes, they did consider themselves to be democrats and they supported democratic candidate Eugene McCarthy.

  23. McCarthy was not nominated. Bobby Kennedy was another contestant in 1968. He was killed. Humphrey was the nominee. The independent candidate was George Wallace. He is a precursor of today’s tea party.

  24. Jill,

    You said that people who consider themselves liberals support the same kind right wing positions as liberals. I said I consider myself a liberal who does not support such positions and provided you with examples of some of the programs I support and some of the issues that I am concerned about.

    *****

    “Liberal and conservative do not have the meaning they used to. That is how it is possible for people who call themselves liberals to support reactionary policies. It is why the tea party principles have credence in a wide circle in our society. Many people agree with tea party principles, both avowed tea partiers and people who think of themselves as liberals.”

    I think you’re confusing the terms Democrat and liberal. I still go by the old definition of liberal. BTW, what percentage of people who consider themselves tea partiers are Democrats? What percentage of tea partiers identify themselevs as liberals? I believe the great majority of tea partiers are Republicans and/or right-wing conservatives.

    *****

    “Today, the peace movement often identifies Democrats as the party of peace and Republicans as the party of war. Yet, reality shows us this is completely untrue. We need to return to this idea of looking strictly at actions, not party, then working from there.”

    That’s the choice of the movement. Did the liberals tell the movement to identfy with the Democrats? Did the liberals support a preemptive war with Iraq?

  25. George McGovern was the peace candidate in 1972. He was also a democrat. Nixon beat him in a landslide.

  26. Swarthmore mom,

    I must have been writing my previous comment when you posted yours about McGovern.

    BTW, my state of Massachusetts was the only one to go for McGovern in 1972. I still remember standing outside the polling station for hours holding my McGovern sign.

  27. Elaine,

    I’m not trying to be hurtful here but you keep missing my points. I tried to explain that liberals aren’t a monolith. I agree with you that many liberals are old school, social justice liberals. I believe with all my heart that you are a social justice liberal.

    I also said there are other people who consider themselves liberal (people I personally would not consider liberal) who support the policies of the tea party. I don’t mix up Democrats with liberals although I do believe many people who are Democrats consider themselves to be liberals. People who hold reactionary beliefs (which I have listed above) are now called liberal in our society. That’s not something I made up, it’s just the truth.

    I could look up the percentage of Democrats who are in the tea party but that’s not my point. My point is this. There is a set of reactionary beliefs. These beliefs are not confined to people who self identify as members of the tea party. These beliefs, which Mike A. listed are held by a great number of people in our society, to include Democrats and people who self identify as liberals, who would never dream of being in the tea party. I believe Mike A. errs in calling them tea party values when in fact they are more accurately named, reactionary values. I say this because the beliefs in the tea party and in a certain set of Democrats and liberals are identical, (as I pointed out). We keep missing how these ideas are identical because we are stuck in a loop.

    We think such beliefs are only held by people in the tea party when in fact, these beliefs are held in common by many people, both inside and outside the tea party. If we get out of the loop by looking at actions instead of attaching everything to one party or another, we can break free of the loup. Otherwise, we will simply keep on attributing a certain set of ideas to others while failing to realize we MAY have also embraced the same ideas. If we find that we did embrace those ideas we can reject them and move on to make a better society.

  28. Jill,

    I think you’re missing MY point.

    You wrote: “The problem is who is and who isn’t included in supporting the value system of the tea party. What has happened in our nation is that people who consider themselves polar opposite of the tea parties, people who truly feel they are liberals, have come to believe in and support extreme right wing positions.”

    Your words implied that all of us who consider ourselves liberal share belief in the same right-wing positions as tea partiers. I think Mike got it right. The tea partiers have stated their support for most right-wing positions and values. They’ve sided with Governor Walker and against public sector workers in Wisconsin. How many Democrats and/or liberals have done that? How many Democrats and/or liberals are out to gut Medicare, Planned Parenthood, NPR, etc.? How many liberals are against a woman’s right to have control over her own body? How many liberals supported the likes of Governors Walker, Snyder, Christie, Kasich, Rick Scott??? How many liberals believe that the wealthiest Americans need tax breaks?

    You say liberals hold the same right-wing beliefs as tea partiers. Which right-wing beliefs are you talking about?

  29. I dont know, maybe Tea Partiers arnet all that bad.

    Most of us dont think like a serial killer.

    “‘Everyone’s God and if we don’t wake up to that there’s going to be no weather because our polar caps are melting because we’re doing bad things to the atmosphere.

    ‘If we don’t change that as rapidly as I’m speaking to you now, if we don’t put the green back on the planet and put the trees back that we’ve butchered, if we don’t go to war against the problem…’ he added, trailing off.”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1378178/Charles-Manson-breaks-20-year-silence-40th-anniversary-gruesome-Sharon-Tate-murders.html#ixzz1JuzysE19

  30. Elaine,
    I agree with your comment completely. I don’t care which party they may or may not support, but I consider myself a progressive liberal and I would not sit still for the Tea Party and their Republican friends as they attack gays, women and the middle class.

  31. Swarthmore mom
    1, April 18, 2011 at 2:40 pm
    Blouise, Thanks, I don’t think the racism of the tea party should be minimized.

    ===========================================================

    It is easy to separate the words from the actions and it is always the actions that count.

    If you notice, one of the favorite lines a teabagger uses is “half white” when referring to Obama. For some reason they think this cloaks their racism when in actuality the use exposes it.

    Words that twist and turn illuminate manipulation and the only time manipulation is needed is if there is something to be hidden.

    The teabaggers have made their beds and now must lie in them. The actions of officials they supported speak with great clarity.

  32. Otteray Scribe,

    When a teabagger uses the half white phrase on this blog I always refer them to Buddha who is half blue and half yellow … they never seem to get the joke but I keep trying.

  33. Otteray Scribe
    1, April 18, 2011 at 8:58 pm
    I doubt they will turn green with envy.

    =====================================

    Oh brother … :roll:

  34. Amazing how important a colon can be. As far as the Tea Partiers are concerned, they really have a colon full of…..something.

  35. This is one tea partier that thinks most of you will look real good one day wiht a red dot on your head (and I don’t mean like the people in India).

  36. Intellectually stunted. No, I just believe you have no right to what I earn. I don’t believe in generational theft which is what your social programs are doing. To pay of the Nat’l Debt, each CITIZEN owes $45,000. To cover the liability for social programs (SS, Medicaid, Medicare) each citizen owes over $200,000. Thanks to your line of thinking, every child born into this world does so with a $245,000 bill hanging on his shoulders. Can you pay your portion of this debt moron??? What gives you authority to steal from my children??? When this all breaks, because this country collapses under the burden of a debt it can not repay, those that support such policies will then be forced to pay their debt. I would love to see you, or any other idiot in this line of post come to my home and demand that I pay for their free ride in life. It would be their last demand.

  37. It’s so amazing to me. A country built on INDIVIDUAL sacrifice, all done in order to leave the next generation a country better that they enjoyed, turn into a bunch of bleeding heart whiners whose demands never cease, and doing so all on the credit card of their children.
    IF YOU CAN’T PAY FOR IT YOU DON’T GET IT. IF YOU CAN’T PAY FOR IT, YOU DON’T DESERVE IT. You’re idea that my children are required to pay for YOUR needs is creating a powder keg just waitng to erupt. I promise you, you will be on the wrong side when it explodes.

  38. Your threats could be your last demand . . . at least not ones made to your guards. Threats made against another’s life made via the Internet are a felony.

    Not to mention your ridiculous assumptions that you’re all that, redneck.

    Which are as funny as you are stupid.

  39. The Truth About the Tea Party: Matt Taibbi takes down the far-right monster and the corporate insiders who created it
    By MATT TAIBBI
    Rolling Stone
    SEPTEMBER 28, 2010
    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-on-the-tea-party-20100928

    Excerpt:
    It’s taken three trips to Kentucky, but I’m finally getting my Tea Party epiphany exactly where you’d expect: at a Sarah Palin rally. The red-hot mama of American exceptionalism has flown in to speak at something called the National Quartet Convention in Louisville, a gospel-music hoedown in a giant convention center filled with thousands of elderly white Southerners. Palin — who earlier this morning held a closed-door fundraiser for Rand Paul, the Tea Party champion running for the U.S. Senate — is railing against a GOP establishment that has just seen Tea Partiers oust entrenched Republican hacks in Delaware and New York. The dingbat revolution, it seems, is nigh.

    “We’re shaking up the good ol’ boys,” Palin chortles, to the best applause her aging crowd can muster. She then issues an oft-repeated warning (her speeches are usually a tired succession of half-coherent one-liners dumped on ravenous audiences like chum to sharks) to Republican insiders who underestimated the power of the Tea Party Death Star. “Buck up,” she says, “or stay in the truck.”

    Stay in what truck? I wonder. What the hell does that even mean?

    Scanning the thousands of hopped-up faces in the crowd, I am immediately struck by two things. One is that there isn’t a single black person here. The other is the truly awesome quantity of medical hardware: Seemingly every third person in the place is sucking oxygen from a tank or propping their giant atrophied glutes on motorized wheelchair-scooters. As Palin launches into her Ronald Reagan impression — “Government’s not the solution! Government’s the problem!” — the person sitting next to me leans over and explains.

    “The scooters are because of Medicare,” he whispers helpfully. “They have these commercials down here: ‘You won’t even have to pay for your scooter! Medicare will pay!’ Practically everyone in Kentucky has one.”

    A hall full of elderly white people in Medicare-paid scooters, railing against government spending and imagining themselves revolutionaries as they cheer on the vice-presidential puppet hand-picked by the GOP establishment. If there exists a better snapshot of everything the Tea Party represents, I can’t imagine it.

    After Palin wraps up, I race to the parking lot in search of departing Medicare-motor-scooter conservatives. I come upon an elderly couple, Janice and David Wheelock, who are fairly itching to share their views.

    “I’m anti-spending and anti-government,” crows David, as scooter-bound Janice looks on. “The welfare state is out of control.”

    “OK,” I say. “And what do you do for a living?”

    “Me?” he says proudly. “Oh, I’m a property appraiser. Have been my whole life.”

    I frown. “Are either of you on Medicare?”

    Silence: Then Janice, a nice enough woman, it seems, slowly raises her hand, offering a faint smile, as if to say, You got me!

    “Let me get this straight,” I say to David. “You’ve been picking up a check from the government for decades, as a tax assessor, and your wife is on Medicare. How can you complain about the welfare state?”

    “Well,” he says, “there’s a lot of people on welfare who don’t deserve it. Too many people are living off the government.”

    “But,” I protest, “you live off the government. And have been your whole life!”

    “Yeah,” he says, “but I don’t make very much.” Vast forests have already been sacrificed to the public debate about the Tea Party: what it is, what it means, where it’s going. But after lengthy study of the phenomenon, I’ve concluded that the whole miserable narrative boils down to one stark fact: They’re full of shit. All of them. At the voter level, the Tea Party is a movement that purports to be furious about government spending — only the reality is that the vast majority of its members are former Bush supporters who yawned through two terms of record deficits and spent the past two electoral cycles frothing not about spending but about John Kerry’s medals and Barack Obama’s Sixties associations. The average Tea Partier is sincerely against government spending — with the exception of the money spent on them. In fact, their lack of embarrassment when it comes to collecting government largesse is key to understanding what this movement is all about — and nowhere do we see that dynamic as clearly as here in Kentucky, where Rand Paul is barreling toward the Senate with the aid of conservative icons like Palin.

    Early in his campaign, Dr. Paul, the son of the uncompromising libertarian hero Ron Paul, denounced Medicare as “socialized medicine.” But this spring, when confronted with the idea of reducing Medicare payments to doctors like himself — half of his patients are on Medicare — he balked. This candidate, a man ostensibly so against government power in all its forms that he wants to gut the Americans With Disabilities Act and abolish the departments of Education and Energy, was unwilling to reduce his own government compensation, for a very logical reason. “Physicians,” he said, “should be allowed to make a comfortable living.”

  40. So explain to me sir, do you have the $245,000 you owe to this government to support it’s unlawful entirement programs? Do you have the $245,000 per child in your household? what is YOUR plan to pay back your portion of this debt? What makes you think you have a right to demand that I or my children pay for your? I look forward to each of your well thought out answers to these questions. The problem is, you will have an answer to none of them, yet you continue to believe that you should make no sacrifice. Your line of thinking never has answers, you just want more and more. Did you live in your parents house until you were 34 demanding they take care of you. YOU are not MY problem.

  41. By the way, you lost any credibility when you entered this place with a threat of violence, you dumb redneck.

    You acted like a rude violent child, so I’ll just continue to treat you like one: with ridicule.

  42. BIL, he may be in Twinkie withdrawal. When you live in Mommies basement, you cannot let yourself run out of Twinkies. Needs to tell Mommy to go get some more.

  43. Holy crap! Mr union suck,
    You may want to look at your numbers. Facts are a funny thing. Social Security is solvent for another 30years and has absolutely no impact on the national debt. You need to stop watching Fox News.

  44. raff, I thought that was pizza. I would not have survived grad school had it not been for pizza and potato soup.

  45. UnionSuck: Who said you could breed? Specifically, there’s NO DIVING signs posted in the shallow-end of the gene pool, and apparently you ignored them.

    Further, place a red-dot on my forehead and I’ll change your brain with a 162 grain BTHP. You won’t be the first.
    If you’re too close for the distance gun, I’ll restate the above mentioned proposition – your vest won’t save you.
    Feel free to email me, if you’d like to make an appointment.

    All this from a fairly conservative (Constitutionally), Dick Nixon was the peace candidate in ’68, gay rights/womens rights supporting/abortion-hating but understanding why it should be safe, legal, and rare/fairly libertarian (ie: liberal towards individual rights) person, who sees the felonization of America, and the lack of immigration reform and secure borders as an issue. Oh, and legalize marijuana, no pot-head has ever shot any of my colleagues, something I can’t say about crack/meth/coke.

    So man-up and bring your dot, only who will support your children when you’re worm-food? Oh yeah… Social Security will send them a nice monthly “survivors check”.

    43north@gmail.com

    UnionsSuck wrote: So explain to me sir, do you have the $245,000 you owe to this government to support it’s unlawful entirement programs? Do you have the $245,000 per child in your household? what is YOUR plan to pay back your portion of this debt? What makes you think you have a right to demand that I or my children pay for your? I look forward to each of your well thought out answers to these questions. YOU are not MY problem.

  46. Jill, I understand your position as it’s been my opinion if you’re so far left and so far right, not to be seen from the middle then you’re both in close proximity.

    Respectively 178 degrees behind me to either side, and 4 degrees apart from your allegedly most-hated countryman.

    A Godwin’s moment: The Nazis found friends in the Communists in overthrowing the Weimar Republic. The found friends against the Jews, Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Roma, etc…, and then they turned on each other. Not that the Communists hadn’t been doing so amongst themselves for the prior two decades… or the subsequent half-century.

    A prime example of diametrically opposed forces finding mutual ground against the middle.

    Within very liberal circles, there’s an argument on wether or not progress can be made from the center. Much like the Republicans look so moderate, when there’s a Teahadist point-of-view on TV for comparison. Result: the Dems cave, and accept the new Republican view of ‘center’ as-acceptable.

    There’s a view, that the Democrats need a social anarchist of the farthest left to emerge, a movement screaming to ‘destroy Wall Street’ and giving the 9-11 attacks as an example of valid protest.

    All of a sudden, Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau seems a very reasonable alternative.

    Compared to anarchist bombs, or commodity price manipulation indictments, not to mention a 35% withholding tax on every trade, future, and dividend transaction.

  47. “I don’t know if religionism is a word”

    I stopped reading after this sentence. If the writer has no concern about his own article as to not research info to see if he is correct–then I have no concern in reading it.

  48. rcampbell said:

    “They are the 21st century John Birch Society and should be ignored as the Birchers were. They deserve no more than our contempt, our disdain and disgust.”

    Tell me rcampbell—what exactly is wrong with the teachings of the John Birch Society?? I’m all ears.

  49. Larry, the JBS was met with disdain, contempt and disgust by thinking people. They were nothing more than an amalgam of the KKK without the white robes and neo-Nazis without armbands. Paranoid conspiracy theorists who saw a commie behind every door. Why should such a group be taken seriously. Just how many times do you hear of a Bircher any more, outside a neo-Nazi encampment?

    They are not relevant, being just another fringe group relegated to the dustbin of history.

  50. 43north,

    “There’s a view, that the Democrats need a social anarchist of the farthest left to emerge, a movement screaming to ‘destroy Wall Street’ and giving the 9-11 attacks as an example of valid protest.

    “All of a sudden, Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau seems a very reasonable alternative.”

    **********

    Who has a view that Democrats need a social anarchist of the farthest left to emerge…that Democrats want to ‘destroy Wall Street’?

    Do you have a problem with Elizabeth Warren? I happen to think that she is one ethical and “reasonable” individual working in governement who has Americans’ best interests at heart. Why do the Republicans fear and dislike her so much?

  51. Elaine, I consider 43north a friend; he is a former peace officer and public servant who is given to rather cryptic, almost Oracle-like pronouncements. That last one, however, left me scratching my head. I eagerly await some clarification if he will give it.

  52. Otteray,

    “… it’s been my opinion if you’re so far left and so far right, not to be seen from the middle then you’re both in close proximity.”

    That is another comment made by 43north that makes no sense to me.

  53. Elaine….OS…

    It makes no sense….but if you are attempting to make sense out of words written….I think he was saying that you even though you disagree are in the same camp, even though you disagree…there is really no difference…that the/you are on the edge…no one is even close to the middle…. but hey its just my interpretation…

  54. AY,

    Just because two groups may be far from the middle doesn’t mean that they are in close proximity. People on the far left hold very different views from people on the far right.

    Our country has been moving farther and farther to the right. What once seemed like moderate left-wing views are being perceived today as more extreme. We have Democrats talking about making changes to Medicare and Social Security–while bailing out the millionaire/billionaire crooks of Wall Street. We have an Administration that caved on continuation of the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

  55. I found 43 north’s point about the far left 4% and far right 4% becoming friends interesting. He compared it to what happened in Germany in the thirties with the communists and the nazis. Isn’t that what someone on this blog is suggesting? The intention of both is to overthrow the government.

  56. Elaine M.,

    I leave you with the works of W. Somerset Maugham to ferret out the true meaning of the words so said….

  57. There are those in the democratic party that are urging Elizabeth Warren to run against Obama in the democratic primary. It does not look like she will do it though.

  58. Elaine, I think the reference was to the time BEFORE Hitler came to power, when he needed support from anywhere he could get it, in order to take power himself. After he took office as Chancellor, then things changed.

  59. Elaine, The communists held seats in the German parliament. I have said before that I do not want to be in a coalition with the tea party to overthrow Obama.

  60. Otteray,

    I realize that. My point was to show that the Nazis and Communists weren’t always working together on the same side. While I know that there have been one or two times when the left and the tea party shared a similar view on a specific issue–liberals and the tea partiers are most often on opposite sides of the political spectrum.

  61. Elaine, I have seen a permutation of the classic depiction of the left/right political spectrum morphed from a horizontal bar to a circular configuration by bringing the left/right ends of the bar up until they touch and form the circle with the most extreme left and right political types touching. That kind of leaves anarchy as the polar opposite if the circular graph is measuring government types based on control exerted from most controlling to least controlling. Maybe 43North is alluding to that. While methods, motives and aims differ the result is similar, high degrees of control to make them work. This is my best guess of the meaning of the statement.

  62. Swarthmore mom,

    Martin Niemöller quotation:

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out —
    Because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out —
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
    Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

  63. lottakatz,

    43north may be alluding to that. I was just attempting to make the same point that I made to Jill earlier on in this thread. I don’t believe that tea partiers and liberals share the same far right-wing beliefs and positions.

    Are you saying that both the tea partiers and liberals want to overthrow the government?

  64. Thanks the Niemöller quotation, Elaine M.

    I’ll say it again:

    If what I’m seeing is any indication…

  65. Elaine I think it is the far far left and the far far right that north is talking about not liberals in general. The common thread is that Obama is not a legitimate president and should be impeached or overthrown. They share a common goal.

  66. Swarthmore mom,

    It is the far right birthers who believe Obama is not a legitimate president. There are many liberals who think that some of the things Obama has done are not constitutional or ethical. (I don’t see that as a common thread.) That is why some on the far left think Obama should be impeached. They felt the same way about Bush.

  67. Elaine, I am talking about the few that say to overthrow Obama like the people in Egypt overthrew Mubarek. It has been said on this blog more than a few times by a far left poster.

  68. Swarthmore,

    Were there posters who actually encouraged a violent armed overthrow of our government? Are you sure those weren’t just hyperbolic statements they were making?

  69. lottakatz posted the following to the Jan Brewer thread:

    Michigan has exercised it’s emergency powers to take control of a city, appoint an emergency manager, nullify the duties of the elected officials and pave the way for a massive property rip-off that benefits a locally powerful business group. Here’s the Maddow vid. Jan needs to take lessons from Rick Snyder to see how real corruption is played:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/42654363#42654363

    ——-

    Yet another example of “why the Tea Party is dangerous.”

    (Those involved have ties to the Koch brothers, which isn’t a big surprise…)

  70. Elaine: “Are you saying that both the tea partiers and liberals want to overthrow the government?”


    No. But both far left and far right governments and the political forms they represent exert a great deal of control over their citizens in my speculation as to Norths meaning. At the extremes, no matter what the propaganda, you’re dealing with fascists, communists, and authoritarians of all manner- only the uniforms are different. That’s how it plays out in reality no matter how happy and empowered the peasants on the posters look.

  71. Swarthmore mom,

    You’re right. My mistake!

    That said, any type of attempted overthrow of our government would most likely bring on some type of violence–as it did in Egypt.

  72. I can’t agree with 43North’s idea that the extremes of both left and right are actually very close to each other. They both may not like the present administration, but for very different “reasons”. I can’t see them cooperating in any actions, at least not for very long.

  73. Elaine,

    Going way back… Monk did play organ for a touring preacher in his teens.

    Larry,

    I thought Shakespeare coined words all the time.

  74. There is a difference between advocating violence and warning that it is likely an inevitable outcome due to choices being made by the current and previous administrations. That difference is between lighting a match and saying “Hey, look . . . that building is on fire.”

    To be clear: I prefer a peaceful solution.

    In the wake of Congressional inaction to rectify the abomination that is Citizens United, however, I don’t think we’re going to get one.

    Multi-national and large corporations don’t give a flying shit whether people suffer and die or not as long as they are maximizing their profits.

  75. Buddha,

    That’s because corporations don’t care about anything. They’re a process, not an intelligence. I think the sooner we start speaking about them in those terms instead of anthropomorphizing them.

    I wonder if our true modern pantheon isn’t “corporations.”

  76. Gyges,

    I agree. Corporate personality, in the legal sense of the term, has gotten out of hand as has the public perception of corporations. They are not real people. They are tools being misused by sociopaths to avoid liability both civil and criminal.

  77. Buddha,

    I am trying to decide if they’re tools that are being misused by sociopaths or tools that have a side effect of creating pseudo-sociopaths. The idea of a corporation is to separate the person from the business. When effective that can also shield the person’s conscious from the results of the businesses actions. Meaning that a person who would never dream of lighting a kid on fire might decide not to recall the pinto because it’s not their actions that are causing the deaths, it’s the companies.

    The two have different implications as far as solutions to the current problems. If it’s a problem with sociopaths running things, then it’s a matter of enforcement. If it’s a problem with creating sociopaths, then there needs to be a restructuring of society and the legal system surrounding corporations.

  78. Raff, I do not presume to speak for 43N. He is a big boy and can speak for himself if he so chooses. However, I think the reference is to the fact that extremes on both sides sometimes have a common goal; in this case, to get rid of what we have and install something else. Now that “something else” is going to take quite a different form, just as the Communists got badly burned when their partners in crime turned on them in 1933-34.

  79. Otteray,

    I doubt the Liberals and the Tea Partiers would ever come to an agreement as to what that “something else” would be. That would be why I wouldn’t perceive it as a common goal.

  80. Gyges,

    “I am trying to decide if they’re tools that are being misused by sociopaths or tools that have a side effect of creating pseudo-sociopaths.”

    Honestly? I think it’s a combination of both dynamics.

  81. SwM,

    That article by Craig (your link to laprogressive) was really right on the money.

    Teabaggers are trying to deal with the huge negative impact their candidates have had on the populations in the states they won. They are spinning their words so fast and furiously that it’s making them dizzy … reminds me of the “New Nixon” …

  82. Swarthmore,
    I have to respectfully disagree with Prof. Chomsky on this issue. The Tea party is not ripe for the picking for Liberals. They are radical, racist and greedy individuals who don’t care about their neighbors. They care about numero uno!

  83. rafflaw, Right, Maybe the communists in Germany thought like Chomsky, and they ended up being purged.

  84. Swarthmore,
    Unless I am missing the point of Chomsky’s article, you are correct. What happened to the groups that helped the Nazi’s gain power? They didn’t last long once Hitler got full power.

  85. Very good article Salon.com posted back in September, 2010:

    Tuesday, Sep 21, 2010 07:01 ET

    The right picked the wrong historical analogy
    The real parallel to today’s conservative backlash isn’t the Boston Tea Party. It’s the Whiskey Rebellion

    By Michael Lind

    The right picked the wrong historical analogy

    “Is it a rebellion?” the doomed king of France, Louis XVI, is supposed to have asked in 1789. “No, sire,” a minister allegedly replied. “It is a revolution.” The right-wing Tea Party movement in the United States in 2010 is not a revolution. It is a rebellion.

    The movement chose the wrong historical precedent when it selected the Boston Tea Party of 1773, a genuinely revolutionary event, as its symbol. Today’s Tea Party movement is much more like the misguided and ill-fated Whiskey Rebellion of the early 1790s, during the first term of America’s first president, George Washington.

    The Whiskey Rebellion originated as a protest against the plan that Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury secretary of the United States, devised to pay down the federal and state debts that had been left over from the War of Independence. Hamilton proposed that the federal debt be funded at par — that is, at face value, even though it was trading at only a fraction of that face value. And he proposed that the federal government assume and pay the outstanding debts of the states. These actions, Hamilton persuaded President Washington and Congress, would establish the new nation’s credit worthiness in the eyes of European creditors, making it less expensive for the federal and state governments to borrow money in the future.

    From Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, who was Hamilton’s rival in George Washington’s Cabinet, down through the many Democratic-Republican societies to the backwoods of Appalachia, critics of Hamilton’s plan denounced it as a giveaway to the Northeastern rich. Virginia and several other Southern states had paid their wartime debts and objected to being taxed to pay down the debts of other states. In addition, much of the debt had ended up in the hands of Northeastern speculators, whose agents had traveled through rural areas buying debt instruments at a fraction of their face value. Funding the debt at face value would provide these speculators with a huge windfall.

    When Congress in 1791, at Hamilton’s suggestion, enacted an excise tax on whiskey, along with a tariff, to help pay down the consolidated national debt, the result was the Whiskey Rebellion. Resistance to federal tax collection by frontier settlers in Pennsylvania escalated until 1794, when hundreds of armed men attacked the home of a federal tax inspector. When Washington mobilized the militia, the insurrection collapsed, and the small number of rebels who were arrested were pardoned.

    Today’s Tea Party movement resembles the Whiskey Rebellion — but emphatically not because it is supported only by ignorant yahoos, as many critics of the Tea Partiers contend. On the contrary, just as the Tea Party is supported and subsidized by many elite conservatives, so the Whiskey Rebellion’s sympathizers included members of the early republic’s elite, including Albert Gallatin, a Swiss immigrant who later became President Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of the Treasury. (The mature Gallatin adopted much of the Hamiltonian philosophy he had denounced in his youth and proposed a massive, federally funded canal and road system.)

    Whether they are educated or not, the supporters of the Tea Party movement, like the supporters of the Whiskey Rebellion, are deeply confused. The Whiskey Rebels failed to understand that the federal funding of state debts almost certainly spared them much higher state taxes in the long run. Although the federal excise tax on whiskey was regressive, as a whole Hamilton’s scheme for funding the state debts was more progressive than debt payment schemes by the individual states would have been. For example, the state of Massachusetts alone had planned to pay its debt by raising more than $1 million a year in new taxes. In contrast, the interest on the consolidated national debt of $75.6 million required only $4.6 million from the entire United States. And whereas states repaying their debt would have relied heavily on highly regressive property taxes or poll taxes, the federal government raised revenue mainly from tariffs paid primarily by the affluent. While the rich disproportionately benefited from federal assumption of state debt, they also disproportionately paid the costs, sparing ordinary Americans the taxes that the states otherwise might have imposed. But the Whiskey Rebels were too busy grabbing their muskets to understand their own interests.

    In the same way, the Tea Partiers who denounce the TARP and the 2009 stimulus fail to understand that the alternatives to those much-demonized policies would have been much worse. In a financial crisis, the government must rescue the financial system on which the rest of the economy depends. Progressives can plausibly argue that it would have been better to nationalize the banks, while recapitalizing them. But Tea Party conservatives who argue that the government should have allowed the national and global banking systems simply to collapse are, to be blunt, ignorant fools. And they are ignorant fools, too, when they argue that the 2009 stimulus was too large, when in fact it was too skewed toward tax cuts and too small to play its necessary role in boosting aggregate demand when consumer spending had cratered. The depth of their ignorant folly is demonstrated by the fact that most credible Republican conservative economists supported both the TARP and some sort of stimulus.

    In another, even more important respect, the Tea Party resembles the Whiskey Rebellion rather than the Boston Tea Party. The Boston Tea Party was the beginning of a genuine popular revolution whose purpose was not to oppose government as such, but to transfer government from unelected rulers in Britain to elected representatives in the U.S. Once that transfer had taken place, the federal and state governments had the right to impose taxes, even stupid and counterproductive taxes, which Americans were free to protest against — but only by means short of violence. George Washington was perfectly consistent in leading the revolution against illegitimate British authority and later taking to the saddle again, as president, to assert the legitimate authority of the federal government during the Whiskey Rebellion.

    From the Whiskey Rebels to the Confederates to the Tea Party movement, there has been a minority tradition that viewed the American Revolution as a rebellion against government as such, rather than as a revolution on behalf of popular government. And from Thomas Jefferson to Newt Gingrich, crafty demagogues, when they are out of power, have portrayed the elected representatives of the American people as a tyrannical, alien force, only to exercise the full powers of the government without apology once they have successfully ridden paranoia to power.

    Claims that the nation is about to be crushed by runaway debt have been part of the demagogic tradition, ever since Jefferson battled Hamilton while both served in the administration of Washington. Hamilton was confident that economic growth would permit the U.S. to pay down the consolidated federal and state debts that the anti-statists of his day found so horrifying. He told his friend and mentor, the financier Robert Morris: “Speaking within moderate bounds, our population will be doubled in thirty years; there will be a confluence of emigration from all parts of the world, our commerce will have a proportionate progress and of course our wealth and capacity for revenue. It will be a matter of choice if we are not out of debt in twenty years, without at all encumbering the people.” History proved him right. The deficit hysterics of Hamilton’s day were wrong about the national debt then, and their demagogic, fear-mongering political descendants in the present day are just as wrong to suggest that debt is an imminent threat to the nation.

    While pursuing negotiations with the Whiskey Rebels, President Washington put on his uniform and reviewed the troops assembled at Fort Cumberland, Md., in case they were needed. The violence of the Tea Party to date has been purely rhetorical. Its members will maul, not individual tax collectors, but the tax code, if the movement succeeds in sending even more intransigent reactionaries to the already paralyzed Congress and the Senate in this fall’s midterm elections.

    They can gum up the works, but that is all they can do. Like the Whiskey Rebels of the 1970s, the misnamed Tea Partiers do not understand their own interests and have no plausible alternative program for the nation. They may pose as revolutionaries, but they are only a mob.

    Michael Lind is Policy Director of the Economic Growth Program at the New America Foundation and is the author of “The Next American Nation: The New Nationalism and the Fourth American Revolution.”

    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/09/21/lind_tea_party_whiskey_rebellion

  86. rafflaw,

    Thanks – Just goes to show that the teabaggers still can’t get history right.

    Looks like I missed some exciting troll-bashing! But, alas, can’t stick around to contribute as we are positively swamped with bankruptcy filings this month … will try and pop in again!!

  87. Sorry to be cryptic and elsewhere, but other fires raged, as OS knows.
    ps: hit me with an email folks, if possible (given internet access) I’ll chime-in.

    First:
    Elizabeth Warren was so worthy as I relentlessly campaigned my Senators on her behalf.

    The ‘business-as-usual / thanks for the check’ crowd opposed her as real fiscal policing vs. cardboard cut-out policing would occur. Some people enjoy the comfort of “nothing to see here, ignore the man behind the curtain” – blissful ignorance.

    As to my circular comment, lottakatz was correct.

    Those who seek to overthrow the establishment have the same goal if different ideology. I used Fascists and Communists as an example against the Weimar Republic.

    Otteray Scribe noted The Night of the Long Knives consolidated Hitler’s power in Germany, killing or jailing not only the SA, but the fringe party members with communist leanings.
    That didn’t however, end Hitler’s cooperation with Communists, it merely required them to be out of the country.
    The partition of Poland as an example.

    Now two scoundrels can’t make a treaty*, as one recognizes his own avarice and greed in the other, so war between the USSR and Nazi Germany resulted.

    I’m not so naive as to believe that (anarchists for lack of better word) forming an alliance against the national establishment would result in a long-term relationship benefiting the country as a whole, despite just that forming the basis of our revolution. Planters, speculators, and merchants seeking more gain, with less supervision, coupled with firebrands like Patrick Henry formed a revolutionary core.

    I dare say they weren’t representative of the yeomanry of citizenship, and yet they set the course of politics for over two centuries.

    As “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” remains true, therefore I hold to my 4 degrees of separation.

    *OK, so to every rule there’s a Mao and Nixon… whatcherpoint?

  88. 43north,

    “As “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” remains true, therefore I hold to my 4 degrees of separation.”

    Something has to have been true to begin with to remain true.

  89. Otteray Scribe—-the JBS core principles are:

    •Anti-totalitarian

    •Anti-socialist

    •Anti-communist

    •For limited government

    •Defenders of the original intention of the Constitution

    •Opposed to wealth distribution, economic interventionism and fascism.

    •Opposed to a one world government

    •Supports immigration reduction

    •Opposes the United Nations

    •Opposes NAFTA

    •Opposes CAFTA

    •Opposes the North American Union [cites the Security and Prosperity Partnership as evidence of NAU]

    •Supports ending the Federal Reserve

    Why on Earth would anyone have anything against these core principles??? Unless you’re anti-American?

  90. Larry, you just listed several reasons to think the JBS not on is, but SHOULD have been relegated to the dustbin of history. If you try to find them in a history book, they are a footnote in the section about the Cold War, if they are mentioned at all. Does the word “irrelevant” ring a bell?

  91. Larry, you forgot to add opposition to fluoridation and impeaching Earl Warren to your list of JBS “principles.” You apparently weren’t around in the ’50s and ’60s.

  92. What is wrong with opposition to flouridation? I read that scientists even in the 50’s said this was very bad. That’s a “conspiracy theory” that scientists actually said this?

    Otteray Scribe said:

    “Larry, you just listed several reasons to think the JBS not on is, but SHOULD have been relegated to the dustbin of history.”

    Wanna re-word that? This time, in English?

    Let me guess, you all don’t think the creation of the Fed is conspiracy? Of course it was! It was BANKERS and a few politicians beginning something that is not even a governmental agency—-according to Alan Greenspan, the Fed is an INDEPENDENT agency and takes NO instructions from ANY governmental agency—–translation: they are above the law. Want me to post the clip where he says this to Jim Lehrer?

  93. Isn’t it funny how you guys keep saying the JBS is “irrelevent”, but yet, you keep mentioning them. I didn’t bring them up on this thread, YOU all did. The very ones who call them irrelevent are the same ones who keep bringing them up in conversations on blogs—-amazing. Apparently, you think they have some influence or you wouldn’t keep mentioning them. It’s like when liberals say the Tea Party is a “fringe” group but they keep bringing them up, showcasing they have a large following.

  94. I had not thought about the JBS in forty years until it popped up here. And I am one who keeps on top of news about hate groups and other fringe groups who do not believe in the democratic process. That is how relevant they have become.

    And yes, they are, or were, a fringe group that did not really believe in the Constitution. Especially that part about freedom of association and speech.

  95. Here’s some good news for Democrats and bad news for Paul Ryan and the Republicans:

    70% of Tea Partiers Don’t Want to Cut Medicare Either
    By Elspeth Reeve Apr 19, 2011
    The Atlamtic Wire
    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/04/70-tea-partiers-dont-want-cut-medicare-either/36820/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheAtlanticWire+(The+Atlantic+Wire)&utm_content=Twitter

    The Tea Party movement is supposed to be the engine driving Republicans’ push for sharp cuts to spending and reform entitlements. Representative Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget, which passed the House last week, phases out Medicare for people under 55 and turns Medicaid into block grants. But it turns out that Tea Partiers, like most Americans, strongly oppose cutting Medicare and Medicaid. A new McClatchy-Marist poll shows 70 percent of “Tea Party supporters” oppose cutting those programs–and 80 percent of registered voters agree.

    So though The New Republic’s Jonathan Chait has argued that “the Ryan budget represents the victory of the Tea Party mentality over mainstream conservatism within the Republican Party,” it looks like Ryan’s plan doesn’t represent the activists, either. Slate’s Dave Weigel calls the Marist poll a “nice present” for Democrats, and “pretty ugly numbers” for Republicans. He adds: “If Democrats can keep portraying the cuts as worse than they are–this was done successfully in the 2005 Social Security fight–there’s a win here.” For another articulation of this view, recall that even when House Republicans passed Ryan’s budget Friday, NBC News’ Mark Murray marveled at their political gambit: “Either the normal rules of American politics have changed, or Republicans have walked into an electoral buzz saw–on a Medicare plan that won’t pass the 112th Congress and that many of them didn’t campaign on in 2010.”

  96. Mike,

    He also forgot to mention that they got so extreme that William F. Buckley called their accusations against Eisenhower “paranoid and idiotic libels.”

    Oh and they’re anti-net neutrality. That’s right, they think that you should be free to choose which large corporation filters your access to information.

    Oh and they refer to support for Planned Parenthood as federally funding for abortion. Even though it’s illegal for federal funds to go towards abortion.

  97. Mike A.,

    Have you heard Zimmerman sing his song about how hard it is to be a liberal? It’s a riot!

    If you love Dick Cheney as much as I do–you’re sure to enjoy this Zimmerman song:

  98. Elaine,
    The Dick Cheney song was also outstanding. It is interesting that we have not heard from him in awhile. I wonder if he is going through more heart work?

  99. Funny how all you guys on here call conspiracy theories “nutty” and continually downplay and mock them, but when I say I have PROOF that the Fed is considered to be an independent agency by Greenspan himself—I get ignored…by everyone. Not ONE person addressed my posts above…but you all have the answers…you guys are the ones who are right and justified. All you people do is name call, mock, ridicule, but when someone says they can show PROOF……all I hear are crickets chirping.

    Quite funny.

  100. Larry:

    One of the symptoms of chronic conspiracy paranoia is the conviction that one’s fears are not being taken seriously by others.

  101. Larry, it is not a good idea to claim you have “proof” of anything when visiting a site run by a lawyer for lawyers and those familiar with the law. What you call “proof” would be laughed out of any courtroom in the country. Unless perhaps it were run by Alito, Thomas or Scalia.

    Proof is testable and verifiable. You got nuthin’.

  102. Larry:

    the fed is independent but works with the federal government. Like the conspiracy of Bush and Greenspan to keep interest rates low so Bush could fund an illegal war in Iraq.

  103. “One of the symptoms of chronic conspiracy paranoia is the conviction that one’s fears are not being taken seriously by others.”

    Who said anything about FEAR? You did Mike–no one else.

    “Larry, it is not a good idea to claim you have “proof” of anything when visiting a site run by a lawyer for lawyers and those familiar with the law. What you call “proof” would be laughed out of any courtroom in the country. Unless perhaps it were run by Alito, Thomas or Scalia.

    Proof is testable and verifiable. You got nuthin’.”

    Here is Greenspan himself telling Jim Lehere the Fed is independent and no action they take can be overruled by ANY federal agency. This is PROOF that the Fed is above the law. Greenspan was former chairman of the Fed.

    He says it at the 7:50 mark

  104. I don’t know how you post actual videos into this thread. I have tried posting the URL and the embed code and all that shows up is the URL in my post.

  105. Larry, your lack of understanding of how the Fed works is only exceeded by your lack of knowledge of the law.

    First of all, since the Fed is independent of the Federal Government, no agency can overrule it, any more than they can tell an oil company what to charge for a barrel of oil.

    Being separate from Federal agencies does NOT make it above the law. They are subject to the same laws and legal system as everyone else. The Judicial system is not a Federal agency in the same sense as the Treasury or Defense departments.

  106. Larry,

    You mean like how you ask “what’s wrong with the JBS” and then change the subject and ignore everyone’s answers? That sort of ignoring posts?

    If I was a a propagandist (for fun or profit) I’d at least put SOME effort into it. You just seem to be coasting.

  107. Rafflaw,

    In order to confuse him he’d have to consider them. Conversation isn’t his reason for being here. Honestly, if I wasn’t a little bored, I wouldn’t have bothered with that post. I’m done with him, and will let Mr. Mose Allison do my talking for me.

    This one’s going out to Larry.

  108. Elaine M.,

    Maybe Buddha is trying to audition for a role with Steven Segal….after all they are all in Louisiana…

  109. Gyges
    1, April 21, 2011 at 10:39 am
    Larry,

    You mean like how you ask “what’s wrong with the JBS” and then change the subject and ignore everyone’s answers? That sort of ignoring posts?

    If I was a a propagandist (for fun or profit) I’d at least put SOME effort into it. You just seem to be coasting.

    ========================================

    And now you probably got poor Larry fired …

  110. “First of all, since the Fed is independent of the Federal Government, no agency can overrule it, any more than they can tell an oil company what to charge for a barrel of oil.

    Being separate from Federal agencies does NOT make it above the law. They are subject to the same laws and legal system as everyone else. The Judicial system is not a Federal agency in the same sense as the Treasury or Defense departments.”

    OS, do you even have a clue what you just said? WHO made the Fed independent? Did VOTERS make it independent? Did WE THE PEOPLE have any say in the creation of the Fed? Does the Fed have more authority then CONGRESS? If the Fed isn’t shady, why did the bankers use aliases when they went to Jekyll Island in 1910 and discuss its formation, and why was the Federal Reserve Act passed over Christmas vacation when almost no one was there to vote on it?

    The founding fathers spoke very strongly AGAINST central banks, and the Fed is THE central bank. Do you really think the Fed does this country a service? It is the Fed that has caused ALL of this country’s financial meltdowns. Printing money out of thin air only does ONE thing: creates DEBT. That’s good for this country? Do you realize that in the 99 years since the Fed’s formation the dollar has lost almost 100% of its value? You call THAT good??? Why doesn’t the Fed allow itself to be audited?

    “You mean like how you ask “what’s wrong with the JBS” and then change the subject and ignore everyone’s answers? That sort of ignoring posts?”

    Gyges—excatly what did I ignore? I actually RESPONDED to the avoidance of the core principles of the JBS that I listed. Everyone here ignored the core principles and when I actually RESPONDED to people IGNORING them [by ONLY saying the JBS was “irrelevant” and nothing more], I get accused of ignoring the “answers”?? There WAS no answers——if you want to call saying the JBS is “irrelevant” an answer—which I actually DID respond to! You need medication.

    Please DO tell me what I did NOT answer. I’m all ears.

  111. When I first read this post, I must admit I thought Dr. Turley had lost his mind. Thank goodness it just turned out to be an idiotic guest blogger who thinks free-speech is a license to rant unfounded rhetoric as founded fact.

    Implying that tens of millions of people are Racist, is the very foundation upon which all Bigotry is erected. By doing so, this guest blogger has to me revealed what truly defines a Racist Bigot.

    As an African American who chooses to identify with the principle that Representatives are public servants, not public masters granted dictatorial powers. I am deeply offended by such a callous unfounded remark by this blogger inferring that I am a Racist for choosing not to support an agenda I feel is detrimental to the future of my family.

    I must confess I am somewhat stunned to see such an abuse of free-speech here. I cherish the sanctity of free-speech as I know the vast majority here do as well. However, it is the out right abuse of free-speech, which threatens it more than anything else.

    You have crossed that sacred line of free-speech, when that speech enters into the realm of unfounded slanderous and defamatory hate filled rhetoric.

    The only thing more vile than a Racist, is calling people Racist who are innocent of such a guilt as that of Racism. Inferring such a vile and despotic form of evil upon another with such a flippant disregard to proof, is as vile as committing the act itself.

    I have yet to encounter a Racist member of the Tea Party, however; I have witnessed many infiltrators being exposed as claiming to be supporters. That is not to say there are none who might very well be, even if this was the case you do not judge all by the act of one or even a few. That is nothing short of childish ignorance, and again exactly how a true Racist thinks.

    If you truly wish to know what a Racist Bigot looks like, then find a mirror, and there you will see a grade A example.

    As for your other statements, they are just as ignorant as your first.

    I’ll leave you with a statement of how many of the African American Tea Party supporters address such a histrionic assertion of racism and its past relevance to the present. This is how I taught my children and it is how they are today teaching theirs.

    All people have struggled, but no more than the millions who came before. Oppression as bigotry comes in many shades and cultures, not just that of our own.

    Until we as a people accept this, we choose not to enslave and oppress just ourselves, but the futures of our children as well. Condemning them to the very past we have for so long held in disdain of others.

    When another seeks to unjustly do so in our name, it serves to be far more offensive than the act itself, for such accusations serve to poison the truth with the venom of lies. Thus granting this evil yet another day of the very sustenance it needs to survive, for such a bigotry as Racism feeds upon nothing but lies.

    The only shame to be justly rendered to the past acts of such an evil, is to allow such wrongs today, the sanctuary of another tomorrow.

  112. africanwarrier: Hone your reading comprehension skills. And dial back the paranoia.

    Larry: I do not waste time arguing conspiracy theories with professional paranoiacs.

  113. Racist is as racist does.

    Not all Tea Baggers are racist. But quite a lot of them are. The organization is very tolerant of them by in large. Dick Armey and the Kochs are playing to irrational hatreds to pull the strings of their puppets. Only the ones that have made too big a spectacle of themselves in the media have been ejected. Tacit or express, the Tea Party seems to have no problem with racists in their ranks.

    That makes them a racist enabling organization at a minimum and an outright racist organization at worst although the baser motivations of people like Armey and the Koch is the color of money.

    Your money to be precise. They want it all. But I digress about the color green . . .

    Mike A.’s assessment that they are racists as an organization is indeed correct.

    There are plenty of legitimate ethical and legal reasons to be against Obama.

    His skin color isn’t one of them.

    Keep in mind I think he’s a lying treason enabling fascist sellout asshole.

    But his being black doesn’t have a damn thing to do with that.

    Just like George Bush being white didn’t have a damn thing to do with him being a lying treasonous fascist sellout asshole.

    Weakness of character is not related to skin color.

  114. I will second what the Buddha said. Green is as green does. I just did not have the energy to parse the whole thing. Green people do so well at summing things up in a nice package.

    Nice video, BTW, I had not seen it before. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand…………

  115. “Implying that tens of millions of people” … yeah, right … I tell you, tea has to be a hallucinogenic … this guy is in an empty room looking into the mirror and seeing crowds

    The teabaggers had a grand showing of almost 200 people at their big rally in DC three weeks ago … down in Columbus less than 6 showed up … in Cleveland all of 11 got off the bus. In Jackson, Michigan less than a dozen showed up at the Tax Day Rally. In Huntsville Alabama they cancelled it because it might rain. The few thousand that were supposed to show up in Chicago turned out to be a few hundred … and on it goes.

    “tens of millions”??? … drink the tea, dude

  116. “Larry: I do not waste time arguing conspiracy theories with professional paranoiacs.”

    Translation: When someone mentions FACTS about something that is a TRUE and REAL conspiracy [formation of the Fed] and I have NO FACTS to counter their argument, I will just call them names so I will receive unwarranted cheers and praises from my moronic supporters.

    Who knows what in the hell your comment had to do with MY comments about the founders despising central banks and the formation of the Fed. NOTHING I said about it’s formation was a lie. They DID form the Fed in secrecy and used aliases. It WAS conspiracy. Are you saying using aliases and not allowing the American people to have ANY say in it is NOT a conspiracy???

    Why can’t you answer the following questions?

    1. WHO made the Fed independent?
    2. Did VOTERS make it independent?
    3. Did WE THE PEOPLE have any say in the creation of the Fed?
    4. Does the Fed have more authority then CONGRESS?
    5. If the Fed isn’t shady, why did the bankers use aliases when they went to Jekyll Island in 1910 and discuss its formation, and why was the Federal Reserve Act passed over Christmas vacation when almost no one was there to vote on it?

    Enlighten me and help me to remove my conspiratorial thinking by giving answers to those questions. If conspiratorial thinking people actually received ANSWERS from people, the conspiracies would not fester—but it is my belief that the very same people behind conspiracies do not want conspiracies to go away or else they would provide answers. Just like the 9-11 conspiracy about why the FBI is STILL not letting people see the 80+ videos of the “supposed” plane that hit the Pentagon on 9-11. The gov’t insists that it was a plane and not a missile that hit the building but yet they DO NOT let the public actully see the 80+ videos they have that has captured what really hit the building. [They have claimed that there was no wing damage on the Pentagon wall because the wings “fell off” the plane upon impact—TWO major problems with this theory—1. If wings popped off a plane upon impact, the wings would propel FORWARD, not BACKWARD—meaning, the wings would have shot forward into the building, causing wing damage—and 2. NO WINGS were found on the outside of the building!]

    They could end the conspiracies TODAY if they wanted to by releasing the videos—but they refuse to—why?????

    Africanwarrior——well said! I agree with you 100%. BUT…BUT I also would love to know where the Tea Party was during the 8 years of Bush???? I believe that racism is a very high factor in the formation of the Tea Party, because the EXACT SAME shit was going under Bush—[in fact, worse things were going on] and yet there was no tea party then. One HAS to conclude that Obama being black is a very high factor with the Tea Party. You don’t agree with that? If you don’t then answer this question: Where were you from 2001-2009?

  117. Larry, I call bullshit on your cockamamie theories. I do not have time to waste on you and your ill informed notions. Go get a doctorate in economics, come back and we can talk.

  118. Blouise—-there you go again, implying the Tea Party is a FRINGE group that has no influence and is irrelevent. But YET, the article by Mike says they are “dangerous”. A very very small, fringe, insignificant number of people is dangerous? How?

    I find it laughable that when the liberals want the Tea Party to go away, they downplay the tea party’s numbers and call them “fringe” and “irrelevent”, but when they want to portray them as “terrorists” or “communists” or America haters, they make the Tea Party look HUGE as if they have MAJOR influence.

    You can’t have it both ways. They are either small/fringe or huge/influential. Which is it????

  119. “Larry, I call bullshit on your cockamamie theories. I do not have time to waste on you and your ill informed notions. Go get a doctorate in economics, come back and we can talk.”

    Translation: When someone mentions FACTS about something that is a TRUE and REAL conspiracy [formation of the Fed] and I have NO FACTS to counter their argument, I will just call them names so I will receive unwarranted cheers and praises from my moronic supporters.

    I would win a formal debate buddy! I am listing dates and actual FACTS and your counter argument is calling me a “nut”. Ad hominem attacks is not the same as winning. You take the Bill O Reilly/bully approach. If we were in person, would you cut my mic? LOL.

  120. Larry, both the JBS and the teaparty are fringe groups that will go into the dustbin of history, just like the “No Nothings” and any other number of now-forgotten groups that may have burned brightly for a brief time, then disappeared.

    Here is a “fringe” song for late at night.

  121. OS, do you realize that your refusal to actually READ my posts and answer my questions makes you look like the complete buffoon you are? You call ME the nut with the nutjob theories, but YOU refuse to answer MY questions!

    I guarantee you one thing: If I was well-informed on a particular subject…say engineering, and someone rattled off lies and theories about the subject that I had great knowledge of, I sure as hell wouldn’t respond to that person by saying “Im done with you and your theories” because I would have a multitude of facts to back me up and make that person look like the fool they were. I sure as hell wouldn’t make it appear I was SCARED to confront that person and make them appear smarter!

    But that’s EXACTLY what you are doing to me in this case. You claim that YOU are the expert and the one with the facts and I’m the nut, but yet YOU are the one running from the debate and leaving me, the “nut” as you say, appear to be the expert and the one with all the facts [which of course, I am, but you making my case for me is not the way a debate is supposed to go]. You’re supposed to be making your case with FACTS, not ad hominem attacks—that makes YOU the “nut”, not me!

  122. Larry, in the words of the inimitable Buddha, this is not radio and I do not do requests.

    Thank you for your cooperation.

    You remand me just a bit of this fellow in the black suit:

  123. Larry,

    Let’s do a count shall we?

    Larry defeated on the facts in the past (sometimes more than once) by:

    mespo
    Vince Treacy
    OS
    Slartibartfast
    Anonymously Yours
    Elaine M.
    and lil’ ol’ me.

    Times Larry has won an argument here on the facts or for any other reason:

    Precisely Zero

    I’m pretty sure nobody here is “scared” of your intellect.

    “Amused” might be a better word although I’m sure some might prefer “annoyed”.

    See Larry, what you don’t get is that you’re completely full of crap and almost anyone who graduated high school can tell. Your understanding of history is on par with Grandpa Simpson. Many of us don’t even bother to read your posts anymore . . . the replies, sure, because often they are funny, but your posts proper . . . not so much. When we do, we just laugh and move on. The ideas you spread aren’t even really dangerous because you are obviously in the same league with people who yell from the street corners about how fluoridating the water is an alien conspiracy implemented by the Freemasons because cavities are the only thing that block out the alien mind control rays – that and a conscientious application of aluminum foil.

    Why don’t you try selling your zany plots over at “Legendary Times” or “World Net Daily”?

    http://www.legendarytimes.com/
    http://www.wnd.com/

    The more outrageous the claim or conspiracy, the better they like it.

    Maybe you can scare them with your brain power.

  124. BIL, he does give me the opportunity to post videos ridiculing him. We can give him that. I have been thinking about using the Annoying Orange next, but that might be too cruel on everyone else.

  125. I see the Tea Partiers as an updated, 21st century version of groups like the KKK, the John Birchers of the 20th century, and the Know Nothings of the 19th. What makes them dangerous is that they have a my-way-or-the-highway mentality combined with a lack of empathy for others or an understanding of how government works. They are also history revisionists or are completely ignorant of actual history. Now that some Tea Partiers are in positions of actual power, namely as governors, we are being exposed on a daily basis to how destructive their policies are. In Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida, for example, it is obvious that the governors in those states are about imposing their regressive ideology on their citizens. This has resulted in disillusionment among even some of the Republicans who voted for them. In the case of Walker and Rick Scott, there was already ample evidence in their recent pasts that voting for them was a horrible idea. Rick Snyder of Michigan campaigned as a “tough nerd,” which should be instructive for not falling for that kind of okey doke in the future. I firmly believe that sooner or later all of these men will either be recalled or voted out of office. But by then, they will have done considerable damage in their states.

  126. Elaine,

    “I’m sorry you are so very out of touch with reality . . .”

    Thanks! I literally snorted coffee out of my nose.

    You’d think the writer of that skit reads this blog it was so much like many, many of the conversations here. :mrgreen:

  127. Buddha,

    It appears that some of the Tea Partiers may be returning to reality once again–now that they realize they could lose that “socialistic” program called Medicare.

    Did you read the following article by Matt Taibbi? I posted an excerpt from it earlier in this thread.

    http://jonathanturley.org/2011/04/17/why-the-tea-party-is-dangerous/#comment-223271

    The Truth About the Tea Party: Matt Taibbi takes down the far-right monster and the corporate insiders who created it
    By MATT TAIBBI
    Rolling Stone
    SEPTEMBER 28, 2010
    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-on-the-tea-party-20100928

  128. Elaine, there is nothing like a reality check in their own bank account. It is one thing to spout talking points like the cartoon character in your video, but quite another when reality comes home to roost.

    I figure the tea party will implode much faster than other such fringe groups, and for this reason. In the meantime, we are treated to the spectacle of US Senators and Representatives kissing the behinds of the likes of St. Sarah, Rush “Where’s my Oxycontin” Limbaugh and Glenn “Lemme Sell You a Gold Brick” Beck.

  129. Ninety percent of republicans want tea party “principles” incorporated into their party. I don’t seem them going away anytime soon unless they are defeated in 2012.

  130. SwM, I agree that is what I am reading in the news and on the blogs. On the other hand, I think support for their “principles” is wide but not very deep. They have some very loud voices on the media, especially talk radio and Faux News. That creates tremendous pressure on the Republican party leadership. But as I said, at some point there are going to be some reality bites in the TP folks wallets and they might just start thinking. Of course, some will not and rail against socialism even as they pick up their unemployment checks. But I think many will desert as the batshit crazies take over the party.

    From what I am seeing these days, they might just go down in flames in 2012. They are already engaging in some internecine warfare over who is the most pure. They might just manage to kill off any viable candidates in the primaries. Getting past a party primary and winning a general election are vastly different propositions.

  131. Otteray,

    Rachel Maddow did a segment on her program last night about how the Beltway Press/Cable News loved doing stories about the Tea Partiers disrupting the town hall meetings held by Democrats in Congress in the summer of 2009. She says the Beltway Press/Cable News haven’t been as interested in covering the recent contentious town hall meetings about the Ryan Budget held by Republican members of Congress.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#42726093

    **********

    Here’s a link to The People’s Budget proposed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus
    http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=70&sectiontree=5,70

    Summary:

    The CPC proposal:

    • Eliminates the deficits and creates a surplus by 2021
    • Puts America back to work with a “Make it in America” jobs program
    • Protects the social safety net
    • Ends the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
    • Is FAIR (Fixing America’s Inequality Responsibly)

    What the proposal accomplishes:

    • Primary budget balance by 2014.
    • Budget surplus by 2021.
    • Reduces public debt as a share of GDP to 64.1% by 2021, down 16.5 percentage points from
    a baseline fully adjusted for both the doc fix and the AMT patch.
    • Reduces deficits by $5.6 trillion over 2012-21, relative to this adjusted baseline.
    • Outlays equal to 22.2% of GDP and revenue equal 22.3% of GDP by 2021.

  132. Blouise

    It’s nice to see that you feel the need to keep count of so-called Tea Party attendance records. It’s amazing that you would attempt to claim the Teeny Tiny Tea Party Movement is capable of destroying this nation, or is it the huge green eyed boogie monster, which is it?

    Even though you seem deluded enough to believe that you can have it both ways, realities verdict affirms that you cannot. .

    The simple fact is that you are terrified of a movement that will effectively do away with your Racist Liberal Nazi Baby Butchering race baiting, hate mongering self-servient ideology.

    Do you see how easy it is for someone to just write whatever they wish. The simple fact is, there has not been absolutely one shred of proof to support these claims of a mass CONSPIRACY with-in the TEA Party. Unless you include the fabrications created by propagandizing media who has been caught lying at every turn, counts.

    The TEA Party itself does not represent the movement that powers it. It is a Media produced illusion created by the Media Propagandist of both the Democratic and Republican DC Elitist, which got out of their intended control.

    Both parties are terrified not of the Tea Party, but the fact that so many, whether you like that term or not; of everyday people from every walk of life are uniting despite their differences,and that has always been the DC Demagogue’s greatest fear, especially the Liberal Nazi and Conservative Fascist factions.

    Just as dismantling the Klan did not end the White Supremacist Movement, or Assassinating Dr King did not end the Civil Rights Movement, killing the TEA Party will not end the Peoples Movement to take back our government from the control of the Liberal Nazis and Conservative Fascist power mongers.

    As for those who would obediently pounce upon such a view as a conspiracy theory, we are not the first to see this truth emerging.

    “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace, and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow and the money power of the country will endeavor and prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until the wealth is aggregated into a few hands and the republic is destroyed.”

    U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 (letter to Col. William F. Elkins)

    If there is anything here that fits the bill of a Racist Anti-American Bigot led Conspiracy Theory, it is to be found in this absurdly racist and bigoted article, along with the idiotic bigoted posts that so lamely seek to support it.

    Scholarly Knowledge minus common sense, renders the sum of Over Educated Stupidity!

    This movement is here to stay, and whomever chooses to ignore that fact will perish as a result of their own ignorance, for failing to acknowledge that fact.

    This movement will never die until the days of Entitlement Slavery, both the Racist Left and Right, baby butchering, hate baiting, war mongering tyranny is abolished or exterminated.

  133. That list of people who you “claim” “defeated” me on facts—how many of them actually REFUTED anything I said?

    I will tell you.

    ZERO.

    OS didn’t refute me either…unless you think ad hominem attacks are refutations. I asked him SIMPLE questions that really didn’t have anything to do with conspiratorial issues—like these:

    1. WHO made the Fed independent?
    2. Did VOTERS make it independent?
    3. Did WE THE PEOPLE have any say in the creation of the Fed?
    4. Does the Fed have more authority then CONGRESS?
    5. If the Fed isn’t shady, why did the bankers use aliases when they went to Jekyll Island in 1910 and discuss its formation, and why was the Federal Reserve Act passed over Christmas vacation when almost no one was there to vote on it?

    –and he REFUSED to answer them. Now WHY is that??? Why would he NOT answer these harmless questions? I asked a plethora of Lincoln questions too [on the Lincoln threads] even to the point where I posted LINCOLN’S OWN WORDS and I got nothing but SILENCE from Vince, Mespo, YOU and everyone else. Was it CONSPIRATORIAL to use Lincoln’s OWN WORDS????? Of course not—but you fucktards will say ANYTHING to AVOID answering questions. Even if it makes you look like complete imbeciles.

    OS looks like a scared little school girl because he refuses to answer questions. He gives every reason in the book except the REAL reason: He knows by answering my questions, it will incriminate his own beliefs and worldview—so he does and says ANYTHING to avoid answering them. There is not even any evidence in Mike’s article that actually REFUTES anything he’s trying to prove or disprove—it’s just all his OPINION. But if you go to my site—I actually REFUTE people’s bullshit.

    http://www.realtruthonline.blogspot.com

    Go to this site and you will see how actual refutation is done.

  134. Larry,

    Plenty. However, nonsense often doesn’t require refutation as it is nonsense on its face and fails due to being a false statement and/or bereft of logic. Now run along.

    The World Net Daily called and their lil’ village is missing you.

  135. African warrior. I agree with you 100%. I have been saying all thru this thread how hypocritical these people are for claiming the Tea Party is a tiny, tiny, fringe, irrelevant group of people, yet they are capable of massive damage. It’s like I said above:

    “I find it laughable that when the liberals want the Tea Party to go away, they downplay the tea party’s numbers and call them “fringe” and “irrelevent”, but when they want to portray them as “terrorists” or “communists” or America haters, they make the Tea Party look HUGE as if they have MAJOR influence.

    You can’t have it both ways. They are either small/fringe or huge/influential. Which is it????”

    They claim the Tea Party is an unimportant, non-issue—but when they want to demonize them and act as if they might carry out some terrorist act or that they are violent, then the Tea Party is HUUGGGEEEEE and MASSIVE! LOL. It can’t be both!

    But Africanwarrior—you need to stay away from quotes by Lincoln. I could post quotes by Lincoln [and I have on other threads] that would make your jaw drop [you being an african american]. Lincoln was a dictatorial, racist, un-American piece of garbage who hated state sovereignty, the Constitution and small, limited government. He also loved slavery. Before you say I’m nuts, I can prove it with his own words. I have posted Lincoln’s own words on these threads before proving he didn’t care about slaves and how racist he was, and these Lincoln cultists on here completely IGNORE them and continue to worship him.

  136. Case in point, last year, tax day (April 15) rallies by the Tea Party had a total attendance at 13 large cities across the country of about 25,650. This year, the Tax Day rallies at the same sites had a total attendance of 3,923. The incredible shrinking movement! More protesters were inside the Wisconsin state capitol than attended all the Tax Day rallies for the Tea Party in 13 major cities.

    That sounds like death throes to me.

  137. “Plenty. However, nonsense often doesn’t require refutation as it is nonsense on its face and fails due to being a false statement and/or bereft of logic. Now run along.”

    LOL—absolute garbage. So, what you’re saying is, you assholes don’t have to PROVE you’re right? Your word ALONE is gospel truth????? You just SAYING it makes it right??? How is that philosophy any different from FOX News, George W Bush or any other neocon??

    If I said Lincoln was our 1st president [not the 16th]—THAT would be non-sense on it’s face. YOU fools are claiming that you are RIGHT about things unproven. Conspiracies are weighed on evidence of cover-ups—not on whether you’d like to THINK it’s a conspiracy or not. Using YOUR logic—-OJ Simpson didnt REALLY kill his wife and her friend, because he wasn’t convicted of it—but we all KNOW he did. This falls in line with MOST conspiracies—-we all KNOW they are true or else there wouldn’t be the mass cover-ups.

    Are you all saying there are NO conspiracies?????

  138. Do you all realize that the OFFICIAL version of 9-11 says that the wings POPPED off the plane BEFORE it went inside the Pentagon? This was their explanation why there was no wing damage on the facade of the building.

    Yet, NO wings appear on the outside on the lawn in ANY photos—-and IF the wings did pop off upon impact, they would have propelled FORWARD [like when people who dont wear seatbelts propel forward when they hit trees or walls]—-now, are you gonna sit there and tell me there is NOTHING being covered up when they BLATANTLY lie like that??? QUESTIONING their story that wings popped off the plane is WRONG and CONSPIRATORIAL??? DESPITE the fact that NO wings are in ANY pictures????

    I would like a serious response to this—not your bullshit ad hominem attacks.

  139. Larry, if you came in here saying the Laws of Gravity were wrong, no one would feel the need to defend Newton on that either. It is a waste of energy and time to try and explain things to you, since you keep your mind in a logic-tight compartment. And BTW, what BIL said.

  140. And Larry, Haldol works well for that condition. Just watch for the extrapyrimidal side effects and stay on the Cogentin.

  141. Larry,

    There’s a difference between ad hominem and accurate.

    buffoon\(ˌ)bə-ˈfün\, n.,

    1: a ludicrous figure : clown
    2: a gross and usually ill-educated or stupid person

  142. What I find hilarious is the fact that your reaction continues to be the very thing that incriminates you to begin with. I keep stating that your ONLY responses to me are ad hominem attacks and “it’s true because I say so” remarks, which don’t prove a thing—–and your reaction to that is your continuation of that very same behavior [calling me a “nut”, “kook”, saying I need medication…blah, blah, blah]. How very original.

    I’ve heard it all before. It’s the typical reaction of those who refuse to research facts and answer simple questions. My 9-11 comment was IGNORED by everyone here. Why IS that? Because ignorant assholes like you think it’s un-American and wrong to even QUESTION government “official” stories—-as if they are the epitome of truth tellers. You all would not so much as even READ my comment let alone respond to it, because you know that ANY answer/response you give would be legitimizing my questions about the incident—so that leaves you one option: Reamain in your ignorant stupor and beg for more spoon fed lies by our government.

    To believe that a plane actually hit the Pentagon makes someone a complete nut and in need of mega-doses of medication. Do you see wing-damage on the building PRE-collapse of the Pentagon? NOPE–none! That doesn’t deter you imbeciles from still believing a plane went through it! LOL

  143. Larry,

    What you think of incrimination is irrelevant. Why? Because the quality of your thought is quite low. That is why so few people respond to you, Larry. You’re a paranoid conspiracy theorist and your paranoia becomes more pronounced with every utterance.

  144. “You’re a paranoid conspiracy theorist and your paranoia becomes more pronounced with every utterance.”

    And your lack of debunking them is perfectly sane???? LOL

    What’s more foolish? The alledged fool or the one calling that person a fool failing to prove they are a fool?

  145. I can deliver leased instruments to Organisations or individuals with their
    preferred text verbiage as been approved by their bankers. We also proffersales
    option to interested buyers. Our terms and procedures are so flexible and
    workable by RWA clients. Our lease rate is (5.5+0.5)%+x%. X% IS Lesseebroker’s
    Commission and he determines his commission. Also we have facilities todiscount
    BG and Put you into PPP Trading.
    Contact me through this
    email;
    businessfundinginvestments02@
    gmail.com,ahmedkan66@yahoo.com or through
    skype: in other to furnish you with other information

  146. Be it ideology or stratagem, the most obvious piece of evidence of GOP premeditated malice is the 2010 quote from Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, when he said….”The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” These words lead us to believe that Republicans will do anything, including short-circuiting the economy, in order to hurt Obama politically in 2012.

  147. I have been looking for an article like the one I just read. I had a gut feeling about this Tea Partiers. They will be taking over just like the “brown shirts youth” did in Germany during Hitler. I give you an A+ for your research and excellent article.

Comments are closed.