Crash the tea party

[SteamWake]

An orginized effort to disrupt the tea party events.

http://www.crashtheteaparty.org/

Yes freedom of speech but why so devious?

[GoldenRivet]

Classy.

Why so devious?

because the far left trash in this nation wont rest until the hard working people of this nation are stripped of everything for the benefit of their socialist political agenda.

I would rather my own mother was the most popular girl in a house of ill repute than have ONE leftist family member.

[Oberon]

Crush the Communists!

http://www.ac-nancy-metz.fr/enseign/anglais/Henry/Is_this_tomorrow.jpg

[GoldenRivet]

Crush the Communists!

http://www.ac-nancy-metz.fr/enseign/anglais/Henry/Is_this_tomorrow.jpg

Thats today.

nearly half of every dollar i earn goes to my neighbor. :nope:

I had a strange dream last night.

America's entire military was mobilized because of an invasion on our home soil.

Problem is, nobody knew who was invading, or where the "beach head" of the invasion was located.

This 'invisible invasion' has been going on for years.

[Zachstar]

Sounds alot like that group that goes to tea party protests dressed in expensive outfits and wine and holds signs thanking tea party people for "Their riches" funny thing is most of the time the Tea party idiots go right along with it. There have been only a few reports were there was someone who actually recognized the group within super large crowds.

I hope they have alot of fun! It will be funny to hear what they say at what they think are secret tea party meetings.

[Méo]

nearly half of every dollar i earn goes to my neighbor. :nope:

Really? :06::hmmm:

[Tribesman]

Really?
And nearly half of every dollar his neighbour earns goes the other way.

[Zachstar]

Half my money goes to the tea party neighbors :nope:

[Platapus]

This seems harmless. I am as much motivated to join the anti-tea party as I am motivated to join the team party.

As long as it is non-violent or does not violate someone's rights, more power to them if only for the entertainment value.

I do wonder if this link is actually from the tea party people as a way to rationalize any failures. :06:

[UnderseaLcpl]

I do wonder if this link is actually from the tea party people as a way to rationalize any failures. :06:

That occurred to me, as did the thought that perhaps the tea party is behind this for the purpose of generating anti-anti-tea party sentiments.

I support the tea party movement, and I've personally attended a few rallies and meetings. Most of the people at those gatherings struck me as legitimately concerned citizens who wanted their collective voices to be heard, but some of them seemed more extreme than that.

Even though I am, by my own admission, a radical libertarian, the idea that tea-partiers would commit such an insidious act troubles me. Some tea-partiers seem to think we're already at war, and in any war, the first casualty is truth.

There have been times when I have excercised poor judgement of facts when evidencing my own positions because I am not immune to bias, but willful sedition is wrong, no matter who is behind it.

[nikimcbee]

5th column.

[SteamWake]

Hahaha... oh god thats rich... so let me get this right...

Folks from the tea party create a "crash the tea party" complete with flashy web site so that they have a scapegoat for the odd few.

OMG thats hilarious :haha:

and I need the tin hat... :haha:

Heres a piece from Brietbart... yes I know you recoil in horror at the web site.. :D

"They can't actually debate our message and that's their problem," said Bob MacGuffie, a Connecticut organizer for Right Principles, a tea party group that also has members in New York and New Jersey.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9F1PU2O0&show_article=1

[Stealth Hunter]

Thats today.

You do know that Communism and Socialism are two very different political theories created by two very different political philosophers, right?

[GoldenRivet]

You do know that Communism and Socialism are two very different political theories created by two very different political philosophers, right?

i made no comparison of the two.

I just dont like the idea of running my business all day from 7:30 this morning until now (still at the office as of 9:50pm) just so i could have my money taken from me and given to some welfare kids "gold rim" & "420" fund while he "attends" the city college and cant even pronounce "tranquility" in his "gumment class" text book.

kids these days are ignorant... and your punishment for being a hard working member of society will be that you will have to work all day to pay for their free ride through life.

:doh:

[Stealth Hunter]

i made no comparison of the two.

...how is calling our situation a "socialist political agenda" one minute and then saying, in concordance with Oberon's poster regarding Communism, that "Thats today" not a related statement? You were confusing the two, first saying we're being Socialistic, then we're being Communists. There's a difference, so which is it? Which one are we more of?

I just dont like the idea of running my business all day from 7:30 this morning until now (still at the office as of 9:50pm) just so i could have my money taken from me and given to some welfare kids "gold rim" & "420" fund while he "attends" the city college and cant even pronounce "tranquility" in his "gumment class" text book.

I should hope then you refused government loans when you started your business and didn't accept any financial help from them whatsoever... because that's basically how all these government programs are funded: through taxes. If you don't like the taxes, I suggest you either move to another state or leave the country to someplace that better suites your tastes, whichever is more convenient.

kids these days are ignorant...

Oh the irony of this puffery'd generalization.

and your punishment for being a hard working member of society will be that you will have to work all day to pay for their free ride through life.

And, you know, the public roadways you and everybody else uses, transportation, the military that's there to defend you and the country you live in... I think you can tell where I'm going. If you're successful/lucky enough to own a business, then you can afford to live with higher taxes anyway. If you can't/couldn't, it probably wasn't a good idea to start one in the first place- indulge/endeavor in something that was beyond your means.

[Stealth Hunter]

Crush the Communists!

http://www.ac-nancy-metz.fr/enseign/anglais/Henry/Is_this_tomorrow.jpg

As ridiculous as the propaganda they put out there about the Kaiserreich during World War I.

http://www.100megspop3.com/bark/Propaganda4.jpg

[GoldenRivet]

I should hope then you refused government loans when you started your business and didn't accept any financial help from them whatsoever

Correct.

I paid cash for my current assets (approximately $48,000) and financed the remaining $12,000 ish through my local bank.

uncle sam didnt have squat to do with it.

And, you know, the public roadways you and everybody else uses, transportation, the military that's there to defend you and the country you live in... I think you can tell where I'm going.

I dont mind paying taxes for those things... i DO MIND forced philanthropy... there is a difference between supporting your community through taxes which contribute to roads, parks, police etc and paying taxes which support pookie's sedentary lifestyle and crack addiction

im very middle class... im no millionaire, but i despise the individuals who leech off the hind tit of society... something tells me you would rather we had more people like that.

[Tribesman]

Correct.

I paid cash for my current assets (approximately $48,000) and financed the remaining $12,000 ish through my local bank.

uncle sam didnt have squat to do with it.


As has been pointed out before, you do accept government financial aid.
As has also been pointed out before, you really should get a decent accountant and a better understanding of taxes.

[GoldenRivet]

As has been pointed out before, you do accept government financial aid.

please explain how i borrowed government money or received government grants in any way to start a business.

since you would obviously know my business.

besides even if i did receive a government grant, i used it for a constructive purpose. unlike some folks who blow it on alcohol and sit out on the porch all day getting hammered. lol

[TLAM Strike]

Crush the Communists!

http://www.ac-nancy-metz.fr/enseign/anglais/Henry/Is_this_tomorrow.jpg

Oh it won't be that bad. Just look:
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/9526/posterlenin.jpg (http://img210.imageshack.us/i/posterlenin.jpg/)
We're going to have F*ing Zeppelins Man! :rock:

[Oberon]

TLAM Strike is a Communist!! BURN HIM!! :arrgh!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju3h7yk4Hcg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Unholy_three.png

[TLAM Strike]

TLAM Strike is a Communist!! BURN HIM!! :arrgh!: Hay I'm just in it for the chicks...
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/67/commiebabewithakandmiss.jpg (http://img208.imageshack.us/i/commiebabewithakandmiss.jpg/)

...I just got a thing for subservient Asian women with short hair and assault weapons...

[August]

...I just got a thing for subservient Asian women with short hair and assault weapons...

I'd hit it. I'd disarm it first though... The best commie is an unarmed commie.

[Oberon]

And they say that men are always supposed to mow the lawn...

http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q369/cartman2_album/jsdf0008.jpg

[nikimcbee]

Hay I'm just in it for the chicks...
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/67/commiebabewithakandmiss.jpg (http://img208.imageshack.us/i/commiebabewithakandmiss.jpg/)

...I just got a thing for subservient Asian women with short hair and assault weapons...


Well, if you get the chinese commie chix, you'll just be hungry again in 2 hours.:haha:

[GoldenRivet]

you'll just be hungry again in 2 hours.:haha:

i think i could handle that :har:

Its a risk im willing to take!

[Tribesman]

please explain how i borrowed government money or received government grants in any way to start a business.


Did I mention starting a business?
Though of course you got a business loan from your bank in the region of $12000ish for startup which of course is subsidised...unless of course you think that the banks tax subsidised business loans miraculously become unsubsidised when they are issued to you personally.
Every time you file your taxes you get grants...as a business you get more grants than Joe not really the plumber...unless of course your accountant is crap or has decided you deserve to be screwed over
since you would obviously know my business.

As it happens I find your business fascinating, or rather your claims about your tax liabilities and absence of govt. financial assistance
Remind me again how you got got to your "nearly half" figure.
What was it again? A net payment from the current account balance in the final quarter.:rotfl2:

[SteamWake]

What does any of that **** have to do with the subject at hand.

Honestly pepole the diversion tactic is getting old.

[Tribesman]

What does any of that **** have to do with the subject at hand.

The subject in hand is whatever someone has raised in the subject.
Since Goldenrivet has raised his problems with understanding business finance and the role of tax money in it in this topic it is now part of the subject up for discussion.

But don't you find it funny that he compalins about government involvement in business yet his nick is derived from a business project that cannot have been undertaken without massive government assistance, could never have operated witout tax payers subsidies and has for well over 150 had to be propped up amost entirely by the taxpayer....yet without whose existance would have consigned the US and the majority of it business to being tiny little insignificant side shows on par with a cigarette stand in Arsendofnowhere Alaska

[Stealth Hunter]

Every time you file your taxes you get grants...as a business you get more grants than Joe not really the plumber...unless of course your accountant is crap or has decided you deserve to be screwed over

http://i45.tinypic.com/2nsc2yv.jpg

[nikimcbee]

What does any of that **** have to do with the subject at hand.

Honestly pepole the diversion tactic is getting old.

Sorry, no more talk of chinese commie-chick soldiers.
But she hot thought...

[SteamWake]

Meh the thread went south as soon as the consipiricys came out. /shrug

I dont mind the humor and silly banter but the topic was about an orginized group of pepole with their hearts set on disrupting on what I see as (for the most part) real american men and women fighting for something they believe in.

Did I mention that this 'crash the party' group recieves funding from SEIU?

Sure get out there and counter protest, sure argue, even fight (no fists) but to disrupt via nefarious means shows to me desperation and deception.

[nikimcbee]

Meh the thread went south as soon as the consipiricys came out. /shrug

I dont mind the humor and silly banter but the topic was about an orginized group of pepole with their hearts set on disrupting on what I see as (for the most part) real american men and women fighting for something they believe in.

Did I mention that this 'crash the party' group recieves funding from SEIU?

Sure get out there and counter protest, sure argue, even fight (no fists) but to disrupt via nefarious means shows to me desperation and deception.

I'm not sure if it's the same website, but they found the guy who is doing the website, a school teacher in or-gone, who is running it while he's at school!:o The investigator/reporter called the school admin, and no one wanted to talk about it.:haha: Your tax dollars at work.

[SteamWake]

I'm not sure if it's the same website, but they found the guy who is doing the website, a school teacher in or-gone, who is running it while he's at school!:o The investigator/reporter called the school admin, and no one wanted to talk about it.:haha: Your tax dollars at work.

Is the site still up?

LOL yes it is ... heh scroll to the bottom of the splash page... I'll bite my tounge :D

[nikimcbee]

Is the site still up?

LOL yes it is ... heh scroll to the bottom of the splash page... I'll bite my tounge :D

Yup, it's him.:haha:
Jason Levin, (http://get.lingospot.com/link/?@li2=3639&is_lhid=1&key=SVKEJENJ&ps_id=xToictGVRi&q=QQ:lqOTqjptCQHPSD7BBPUORJJOBIODBSVOqptJ:pnCBOqmj _J:pnCDO4aJm8CPHURA:GSSZKVV&section_key=&site_id=breitbart.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftopics.breitbart.com%2FJason%2BLe vin%2F&url_key=_TaCUO0CGIS:UUGADK&v=1&~boot=1271200616102) creator of http://www.crashtheteaparty.org, said Monday the group has 65 leaders in major cities across the country who are trying to recruit members to infiltrate tea party events for April 15—tax filing day, when tea party groups across the country are planning to gather and protest high taxes.

http://twitter.com/LarsLarsonShow

Here's his school:
http://www.beaverton.k12.or.us/home/schools/conestoga/

oops, there he is!
http://www.beaverton.k12.or.us/conestoga/encore.htm
:haha:

[nikimcbee]

I'd hate to be the main secretary at that school today.:haha:

[SteamWake]

Man the guy's html skills are seriously lacking.

[nikimcbee]

I think everybody ought to email him at work and thank him.:haha:

[GoldenRivet]

Though of course you got a business loan from your bank in the region of $12000ish for startup which of course is subsidised

No i got a loan based on land equity... nowhere on the loan does it say "small business loan" and in fact, this money was not originally sought for start up purposes, though it was handily used for a small margin of equipment acquisition.

Every time you file your taxes you get grants...as a business you get more grants than Joe not really the plumber.

funny, i get deductions based upon my itemized expenses, but the government does not send me grant money. as a white man... i dont qualify for (and dont take this figure literally) 99% of government grants.

besides... im not talking about legitimate businesses borrowing money from banks or lending institutions.

im not even talking about grants to legitimate businesses from the government.

as you apparently cannot read between the lines ill just out and say it.

I cannot stand the thought of paying taxes so that Bomqueque can get her welfare check to buy groceries (a legitimate purpose)... yet, while i am in line behind her in the check out counter and she also buys an equal value of cigarettes and beer and liquor with cash.

Though you might be approving of such behavior... I am not.

your accountant is crap or has decided you deserve to be screwed over

remind me again why you keep going to this?

this is probably the 4th or 5th post from the past few months where you have insisted upon insulting my accountant. (Who happens to be my mother in law... who is one of dozens of accountants for a fortune 500 company... so yes, your comments are both childish and insulting) she knows the laws, she knows her stuff, and has worked the scales in my favor on more than one occasion. so i encourage you to sling your feces elsewhere

why is this need to spur insults? Im seriously interested to know the answer.

In all honesty my tax liability is not that bad.

i had a great deal of deductions to claim (more now that i own a business than ever before) and my refund is greater than it has been in the past.

however, i am angry about the tax codes in the USA because they allow for blatant abuses by people who cannot live within their means and view subsidies and welfare and food stamps as a way of continuing that disgusting lifestyle.

personally i dont understand how you or anyone else could defend it

[SteamWake]

Sigh.... lock it. :oops:

[GoldenRivet]

Sigh.... lock it. :oops:

:haha:

aww come on i was just starting to get entertained!:|\\

[nikimcbee]

:haha:

aww come on i was just starting to get entertained!:|\\

I'll just add, I like bacon:yeah:.


Poor SW:haha:.

[GoldenRivet]

I like bacon

here you go

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/picture/637162/80709120.jpg

[Torvald Von Mansee]

There is a website called f__kthesouth.com (correct the blank parts to go to it) which gives a really good bitchslap toward the red states which gladly TAKE more federal dollars than they pay out in federal taxes. The kinds of people bitchslapped in the essay remind me greatly of the Teahadists.

Also:

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8383/teabaggingdefined.jpg

[nikimcbee]

Sigh.... lock it. :oops:

Wait, don't lock the door yet, I found more!

http://victoriataftkpam.blogspot.com/2010/04/tea-party-sabateur-outed-as-beaverton.html

[Tribesman]

funny, i get deductions based upon my itemized expenses, but the government does not send me grant money.
It doesn't have to send grant money for you be recieving grants.

as a white man... i dont qualify for
Interesting viewpoint, reading between the lines as you suggest you appear to equate grants solely with social welfare payments made to people who are not "white".

remind me again why you keep going to this?

Its because you keep on going back to how you have to pay so much of your money in tax, yet live in a country with relatively low taxes.

In all honesty my tax liability is not that bad.

So every time you write complaining about your nearly 50% tax payments you are only being a bit of a drama queen for effect.
this is probably the 4th or 5th post from the past few months where you have insisted upon insulting my accountant.
Thats because the only other possibility to explain your "huge tax liabilities" was that your accounts were really screwed.
It turns out that was not the case as you are just moaning about fictional payment you have made up.

personally i dont understand how you or anyone else could defend it
Defend what? your relatively low levels of taxation or the black crack whore on welfare in the shop with you?
Come to think of it, since these "grants" you are on about are welfare payments and only non-white people can get them does that mean jim bob who doesn't work and is sitting with a bottle of jack outside his trailer isn't really white?

[Ishmael]

I'm thinking of attending the Tea Party rally here in ABQ with the following sign:

Free The Indianapolis 500!

[mookiemookie]

Meh the thread went south as soon as the consipiricys came out. /shrug

Kind of like when people pointed out the racists and misspelled signs at the teabagger rallies, and you accused those people of being SEIU operatives out to give the Tea Partiers a bad name?

[SteamWake]

Kind of like when people pointed out the racists and misspelled signs at the teabagger rallies, and you accused those people of being SEIU operatives out to give the Tea Partiers a bad name?

Yes pretty much like that... oh hey look I was right ! :haha: Hence this thread.

Oh and its Tea Party not Tea Baggers.

You just keep on trying to make them look like a bunch of uninformed morons and racisist I know some will believe you and that should make you happy.

The problem for you though is that the 'normal' conservatives vastly outnumber your left wing activists. I think everything will be okay in November :rock:

[tater]

The "rich" are the only ones who deserve tax cuts. The left likes to cut taxes primarily on people who do not actually pay taxes.

A "fair share" of federal taxes is the total cost of the budget divided by the population. So a taxpayer (head of household) with 4 total members needs to pay 4 shares to have fairly contributed. No, I'm not suggesting this as a real tax code, I'm simply pointing out what is "fair."

Right now that's something like 12k per head (income and payroll taxes combined—and include the bogus "employer contribution" of FICA as well). So our family of 4 ponies up 48k in taxes or they are being subsidized. Those of us that pay some multiple of that, are the people that deserve a tax cut. Note that we still expect and have no problem in paying more, it just sucks to pay more, AND pay a higher RATE into the bargain—then get demonized by the left when we are the people paying for everything. I'm fine with the poor paying zero taxes, BTW, including payroll taxes. No one should pay NEGATIVE taxes like we have now, and as many as possible should have a real tax liability. That or peg voting to some level of tax liability, otherwise voting is a conflict of interest.

We will get a substantial refund this year, too. Guess that means we can't be appointed to the Obama Cabinet since we don't cheat on our taxes like Geithner, et al, did until caught.

Ishmael, I drove by the last tea party on Montgomery after I dropped off my mom in law (very much a Democrat, BTW). Was pretty low-key. Hopefully they have the sense to make a big show of kicking out or bugging anyone planted with hateful signs. FWIW, I didn't see any driving by last time.

[GoldenRivet]

Tribesman,

this is my final response to you in this thread, then you can just do whatever you want.

The system is abused by many people. race is not the issue, its the fact that common citizens like myself and others pay for these abuses.

though the social diversity in my region or area places a steep - very steep - slant on who abuses the system... doesnt mean its typical of all areas, and I understand that

and yes, the corporate income tax rate for my bracket is actually something along the lines of 25% - which is an outrage IMHO... but thats just my opinion. you might think it is fair... however, once you open your own business and your cash in hand drops by 25% that tends to take a bit of wind out of your sails so to speak.

that also means one in every four dollars i earn goes into the tax pool for the government to spend as it sees fit.

roads? cool

bridges? cool

military? great

Schools? awesome

whatever

however i see the abuses every day. White people do it, black people do it, mexicans do it... its annoying and its wrong and the common american citizen is basically paying money so these people can lay on their backs and make babies and get high all day.

one thing they all seem to have in common is that they are all the same caliber of people. Example 1 (http://jenniferemerling.com/lj/countryliving35.jpg) example 2 (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gcA0ZuKGkI8/SiBniAKc0aI/AAAAAAAABNc/vSqxCA4tzko/s400/fat_black_woman.jpg)

not cool :down:

a problem you have is that you take comments TOO literally.

yes i said that as a white man i dont qualify for 99% of government grants.

i think you are misunderstanding what a grant is... tax deductions are not grants. you cant grant someone money they already have. :06: unless of course you are a thief and you decide not to steal it i suppose.

a grant is a formal and official transfer of money or other title or deed to one individual or entity from another. meaning that you would receive grant money to go to school or to start a business or conduct a science experiment etc

Yes, those government grants ARE intended for minorities and women thats a simple fact in America :yep: and no, its not a big deal to me. It might help my wife, daughter or friend some day.

no... its probably not on the order of 99% that i dont qualify for because im a white male... (probably more like 90%)

but i digress.

You appear to come from a political mind set that it is the responsibility of those who work to give a portion of their money to those who refuse to work.

I come from the political viewpoint that it is the responsibility of every citizen to be a contributing member of society.

You will have a hell of a time changing that opinion... or convincing me that my work ethic is wrong.

To quote Hal 9000...

this conversation can no longer serve any purpose.

[August]

a problem you have is that you take comments TOO literally.

Actually GR his problem is that he's a troll who is looking to provoke an argument from anyone he can cajole into responding, and your problem is that you and a few others keep accommodating him.

[GoldenRivet]

Actually GR his problem is that he's a troll who is looking to provoke an argument from anyone he can cajole into responding, and your problem is that you and a few others keep accommodating him.

you're right.

The thing to do, when someone points out your problem... is to adapt your behavior.

I shall try to do that :D

to assist me in this endeavor he is now being ignored completely thus making his posts completely invisible to me.

[August]

you're right.

The thing to do, when someone points out your problem... is to adapt your behavior.

I shall try to do that :D

to assist me in this endeavor he is now being ignored completely thus making his posts completely invisible to me.


http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/Monty%20Burns.jpg

[UnderseaLcpl]

Actually GR his problem is that he's a troll who is looking to provoke an argument from anyone he can cajole into responding, and your problem is that you and a few others keep accommodating him.

I don't know about that. I've had some decently productive discussions with Tribesman, even though we are almost complete opposites. He strikes me as being a guy with something to say, and can usually make a fairly good case if you press him enough, but who would rather resort to brief insults most of the time. Actually, I guess you could call such a person a troll.

Well, at least he isn't some idiot who regularly posts 2,000-word responses to just about everything, like some Lcpls I know. :nope:

[GoldenRivet]

Well, at least he isn't some idiot who regularly posts 2,000-word responses to just about everything, like some Lcpls I know. :nope:

well what your posts lack in girth, they more than make up for in length :har:

I enjoy reading your stuff.

[SteamWake]

well what your posts lack in girth, they more than make up for in length :har:

I enjoy reading your stuff.

Woah a bromance... :o Brain bleach please.. :haha:

[Tribesman]

race is not the issue,
Then why bring it up?

yes, the corporate income tax rate for my bracket is actually something along the lines of 25% - which is an outrage IMHO...

But clearly not ourageous enough hence hiking it up to 50% to justify the level of outrage you express.

however, once you open your own business and your cash in hand drops by 25% that tends to take a bit of wind out of your sails so to speak.


Once you open your business and the government wants 60% plus a pile of subsidiary taxes in addition then it may take the wind out of your sails ....unless of course you knew what starting a business in that location meant.

you cant grant someone money they already have.
As I said before, it isn't your money until all your dues in relation to it are paid.
a grant is a formal and official transfer of money or other title or deed to one individual or entity from another.
Like granting a waiver on money due between two business entities, like you and the government.

You appear to come from a political mind set that it is the responsibility of those who work to give a portion of their money to those who refuse to work.

Wrong.

I come from the political viewpoint that it is the responsibility of every citizen to be a contributing member of society.

That is a good viewpoint, though it should have the rider that some people are unable to contribute.

You will have a hell of a time changing that opinion... or convincing me that my work ethic is wrong.

There is nothing wrong with your work ethic, just your approach to taxes where you have to exagerate massively to try and make your points sound reasonable.

[SteamWake]

Im not going to reply to every point but I'm pretty damn sure that the conservitives are not the ones trying to make it a race issue.

Thats an age old closely held tradition of the liberal left.

[GoldenRivet]

Thats an age old closely held tradition of the liberal left.

true, without the idea of racism the liberal left wouldn't have anything.

but back on topic.

ANY group has the right to assemble... IMHO any subversive act like the one linked in the original post - is a direct violation of that right.

[tater]

Race is an issue WRT the Tea PArty stuff because it's be made a race issue by the Democrats. The Black Caucus guys walked out through the Tea Party crowd after passing the abysmal health care bill, then claimed they heard 15 racial epithets thrown at them. Considering they were dogged by reporters, with and without tape running, as well as countless people with video capability, not ONE proof of the accusation of the n-word being thrown has been proved. Even with a news service offering $100,000 for taped evidence.

So they have proved they'll make stuff up to try and discredit them.

Are there some racists, loons, or other scumbags that show up at Tea Party demonstrations? Absolutely, I'm sure there are some. There was no shortage of communists at anti-war protests during the Bush Administration, too. Does that mean that everyone against the war that show'd up with a "honk if you want the troops home" sign supported the murder of over 100 million people by communism? No, only those that support communism support that.

Regarding taxes, no one thinks that the poor should pay terrible taxes. The bottom 40-something percent of taxpayers are already a net negative, they can pay nothing—it's better than us paying THEM, instead. Various conservatives have suggested a flat tax—which in all proposed examples has no tax on any income below some value so the poor pay no tax, and the slightly poor pay a lot less. Another proposed tax is the "fair tax" which also includes a provision so the poor pay no tax, and the slightly poor pay a lot less. In both systems, if the poverty level is set at, say, $20,000/year, then the first 20k is untaxed. So if you make twice the poverty level, you in effect pay half the tax rate. 3X poverty, you pay 2/3 the tax rate, etc. (in the fair tax it's a rebate for the tax rate times the poverty level income).

There are other systems I'm sure as well, those are the two you hear about most.

[Platapus]

Even with a news service offering $100,000 for taped evidence.




Which one offered that?

[tater]

Breitbart.

The rest just report the accusation as fact even though none of the reporters, cameras, or security personnel heard any such remarks.

[Platapus]

Seems like someone would have recorded it. :06:

[tater]

Seems like someone would have recorded it. :06:

Or those slacker Secret Service guys who were standing next to the guy who claimed he heard the n-word 15 time yet they heard nothing.

Course secret service guys are notoriously unobservant.

:roll:

[tater]

I'm not a "Tea Party" person, myself. Meaning I don't see myself attending.

That said, as much as they tried to paint them as racists before, my bet is that suddenly, tomorrow, the same protesters will be WAY more racist as seen on the news. That'll be the credulous (it's that or they are very biased, pick one) news reporting on infiltrators as the very essence of the movement.

Some of the tea party attendance claims were clearly exaggerated before (the DC one), OTOH, local events were typically under-counted in the press.

[CaptainHaplo]

I highly doubt that racial and sexual epithets were used.

However - I accept it as a possibility - anger, frustration and a lack of couth can result in such things.

So lets play devil's advocate and say it did happen.

Should the remarks of a few color the whole movement? If you say yes, then how can you defend Obama after he CHOOSES to put into positions of power those who make it clear they support communism, wealth redistribution, etc. How can you not blast the entire left for their calls to "kill bush"?

Of course - if you answered no to that question, then its really a non-story - isn't it?

The only reason it IS a story is because the keft - along with a majority of the press - is in support of a specific ideology, and therefore is attempting to tear down anything that threatens the forwarding of the agenda.

[SteamWake]

Seems like someone would have recorded it. :06:

Yea in that sea of media and a #100,000.00 offer thats been hanging out there for I dunno a week...

If they acutaly had something like that it would have been virual the next day.

[tater]

Haplo, excellent point. I agree.

That said, it's inexcusable for an elected official to lie about this. Sorry, but 15 times with all the press, security, etc, would have been impossible to miss. Impossible. It WOULD be on tape.

[GoldenRivet]

im reminded of CNN going on for days about the crazy white people carrying their guns in Arizona near Obama. Especially the one white guy nut job with his AR-15

Fox gets hold of the video...

turns out it was a black guy with an AR-15

they play the races against one another every day.

just one more example :nope:

[Stealth Hunter]

I highly doubt that racial and sexual epithets were used.

See this:

http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/teapartypic.jpg

(dumbass can't even spell the word right! :har:)

And more:


http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/racist_tea_party.jpg
http://simmerdown3.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/protestor_allowed.jpg
http://img.skitch.com/20090723-tgsrf3uyripd1kjhp8iw1erhh6.jpg
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/teapartysign1sm.jpg
http://www.bobcesca.com/images/tp_Racist_signs.jpg
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20090916TeaParty03.jpg
http://afrocityblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/racist-obama.jpg

These people are a cancer if there ever was one; they're being stupid, violent, dangerous and it's going to bite them in the ass eventually if they don't stop it. You don't go about politics waving around these kinds of signs comparing Obama to Hitler, a monkey, shouting and hollering like a bunch of hooligans. Because the civilized aren't going to take you seriously. Act like you've got some common sense and decency for a change, jackholes.

Something needs to be done about them. Now they're asking for their own militia. Given how they've acted towards the government, we may very well face a string of violence if we allow them to do this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100412/ap_on_re_us/us_tea_party_militia

[SteamWake]

yea nicely done :timeout:

[Stealth Hunter]

What's even more sickening was that these folks asked for it just a week before 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing. Bastards.:nope:

[tater]

While there are certainly some idiots like those sign holders, what about Obama supporters in Che shirts? Or Obama campaign offices with a Che poster?

That would have been like a McCain rally or office with some iconic, but minor Nazi figure on shirts. I've seen baby onesies with Che on them. You can guess the political bumper sticker on THAT hybrid, can't you?

Obama as a monkey? I've see the Bush/Monkey images, what's the difference, we're all evolved from common ancestors, both Obama and Bush are Homo sapiens, after all?

The problem is that people combed huge rallies, and we get to see every scumbag poster on the news as if it was most of them, or even a large %.

During the Bush Admin, OTOH, the news breathlessly covered anti-war protests, and never once mentioned that the sponsor of many big protests—ANSWER—is in fact a communist organization. The didn;t have a problem with burning Bush in effigy, nor were they overly concerned about posters of W with a crosshair on him.

Anyone here every read the huffpo, or dailykos? If they are not smart enough to disable comments, check it out when the news reports some, heck, ANY Republican as sick or going to the doctor. Comments overflow with death wishes.

[GoldenRivet]

Tater... you have to look at group psychology

its only wrong when its the other guys doing it :haha:

I have heard enough of this racism crap

how many of those racists are "planted"?

one has to wonder.

but you're right... Bush has been monkey imaged plenty enough himself... like you said, whats the difference?

well

Answer one: There isnt a difference

Answer two: Bush is white, so you can say or write or doodle anything you want about him and its ok

which answer you go with depends on whether you lean left or right.

[August]

These people are a cancer if there ever was one; they're being stupid, violent, dangerous and it's going to bite them in the ass eventually if they don't stop it. You don't go about politics waving around these kinds of signs comparing Obama to Hitler, a monkey, shouting and hollering like a bunch of hooligans. Because the civilized aren't going to take you seriously. Act like you've got some common sense and decency for a change, jackholes.

Something needs to be done about them. Now they're asking for their own militia. Given how they've acted towards the government, we may very well face a string of violence if we allow them to do this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100412/ap_on_re_us/us_tea_party_militia

For someone who is so judgmental you don't really seem to know anything about the people you condemn SH.

First off they're not the cohesive and organized national group you think they are and their very narrow agenda is going to attract support from a wide range of people. That doesn't mean the movement is suddenly endorsing anything beyond the the issues it was created to address.

Secondly, I'll agree with you that some of those posters you show are way over the top, but the lefts crocodile tears about it don't impress me after 8 years of their engaging in the same type of thing. For every picture you posted I can show you one made about Bush that was just as bad or worse. However given the lefts history of using agent provocateurs, one has to wonder whether the people holding them are real Tea Partyers or some divisive ass like that Jason Levin trying to marginalize and discredit the voices of American citizens exercising their constitutional rights.

We'll find out what the American people think about it come November.

[Tribesman]

Answer one: There isnt a difference

Answer two: Bush is white, so you can say or write or doodle anything you want about him and its ok

which answer you go with depends on whether you lean left or right.
Wrong.
If you wrote that Bush was a dumb ass cracker you would be making a silly racist comment.
There are just on balance a lot more silly racist comments you can make about Obama.
But there you go again GR, playing the "white" victim race card.

[tater]

Wrong.
If you wrote that Bush was a dumb ass cracker you would be making a silly racist comment.
There are just on balance a lot more silly racist comments you can make about Obama.
But there you go again GR, playing the "white" victim race card.

I made the original observation.

Why is a monkey racist for one and not another? The Bush versions usually show (fairly effectively, actually) a similarity in physical appearance between W and some other primate. Since he and Obama are both Homo sapiens, what's the diff? It's not like either of them bear more than a superficial resemblance in certain images picked to highlight this—as would most any other people so singled out (morbidly obese people don't typically look like other primates since wild animals don't get morbidly obese, they die first).

The type of historical attribution of "monkey" is probably what you are talking about, but I always found that funny since that sort of redneck doesn't actually think we (human beings) share a common ancestor with other, extant primates.

There was an Obama delegate that had to back out as I recall because some kids were playing in a tree outside her Chicago home and she called them monkeys—I call my 3 YO a monkey all the time. Ah, here it is:
Ramirez-Sliwinski "came outside and told the children to quit playing in the tree like monkeys. The tree was not on Ramirez-Sliwinski's property," . She had to quit her delegate position over this.

WTF.

That said, at what point are we past that, or are certain jokes and comments allowed forever for one "race" and not another? Won't that perpetuate racism instead of end it?

[Tribesman]

I made the original observation.

I know, and GR commented on it.
He commented in a way which shows he just doesn't get it and in a way where he has to write something which he knows isn't true to try and make his point about being such a poor little victim.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Hey, have you people seen this?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Tax-Day-rhetoric-aside-apf-3276228499.html?x=0

[SteamWake]

Hey, have you people seen this?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Tax-Day-rhetoric-aside-apf-3276228499.html?x=0

Curiously enough everyone I have spoken with that does pay taxes say their taxes have increased... dramatically.

What this article is referring to is the lower percentage rate of those whom probably already do not pay much taxes if any to begin with . That and the "Earned income tax credit" which is skewing the numbers.

Its kind of a weird thing "Oh you dident make much money this year? Okay you get a bigger return".

[GoldenRivet]

All i can say is that my tax liability was larger this year... just enough to be annoying.

You know the truth about it is...

many responsible working people try very hard to live within their means so they have enough money left to pay tax to a government cannot live within its means.

[tater]

I'd have to ask the accountant if our effective rate has slipped, all I know is that we substantially overpaid and get a good refund (because we're not tax cheats like so many members of the Obama cabinet). Remember that as the linked article stated this year (really 2009 tax year) still has Bush tax cuts in effect. They expire. Also, next year the death tax comes back, as does a substantial increase in capital gains tax.

Note that even while the marginal rates are lower now on the top bracket, the top bracket now also pays the highest % of total taxes collected ever. Funny, Bush cut taxes on "the rich," yet "the rich" now pay a LARGER share of total taxes collected.

[mookiemookie]

the top bracket now also pays the highest % of total taxes collected ever. Funny, Bush cut taxes on "the rich," yet "the rich" now pay a LARGER share of total taxes collected.

Very simple reason, too: Because the wealth disparity between the top 10% and everyone else is wider than it's been in years. The rich are richer and thus pay more in taxes.

http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/t106/OnlyObvious/Reaganomics/WealthDisparity_2007-Top10-pct.jpg

[tater]

Good. Of course that graph truncates just before it likely falls off a cliff (least if my post 2007 stock portfolio is any indication, LOL (it's LOL or CRY OL ;) )).

All that money is SPENT. All of it.

Quite a bit is invested. That's the money used by employers to expand. Other bits are spent directly. If you earn very little, you buy a lot of stuff from places like a store bashed in another thread—WalMart. That means the money goes to WalMart, and also a large chunk to... CHINA. Are people in the top 10% more likely to buy chinese furniture at walmart, or expensive furniture made in the US? Do they buy cheap pictures, etc, from China at walmart, or art painted by local artists for thousands of dollars? Do they buy laminate crap from a big box for their remodels, or hire a local cabinet maker who makes it from scratch? Chinese tiles, or awesome stuff like I got from Erin Adams here in ABQ (made at her 4th street studio)? Food—mega food products (I'm surprised that even FOOD is imported now), or local, expensive organic stuff?

I'd argue that of the money spent by the top 10%, a far larger % stays in the local economy. A larger total amount, too.

BTW, while they might have a higher % of the money at any given time, that doesn't mean they use any more government. I'd like to see some calculus that compares wealth and taxes paid to amount of government used. You pay 100X more taxes than someone, and so you drive 100X more, fly 100X more, have 100X as many kids using up schools?

PS—that graph doesn't show disparity, just the amount held as a function of the total. Likely the next 20-30% holds almost every penny of what is left.

[tater]

Sort of related.

A friend of mine was over for dinner a couple weeks ago and had an interesting idea that I' not heard before. He said that people concerned with government spending should change their W-4 so that they have NO TAXES WITHHELD. Then put that money is a special savings account (using withholding guidelines so they don't get behind). The idea would be to start a web site where people sign up and say they are doing this with the goal of forming a lobby to balance the budget via spending cuts. Demand that this be done, or they'll not pay taxes.

That last bit would obviously get them in trouble, but the first part of his idea would screw with government revenue streams, AND they'd not earn interest on it. It would also make more of a news story when the total taxes NOT collected per month dropped by some significant number (clearly you'd need many participants).

Thought it was an interesting idea, anyway, as we used to not withhold, and write a check each April 15th. The plus was we made money on the money, the minus was that, well, writing checks that big makes you want to barf, lol, at least other big checks you write get you something (like a house down payment, car, etc).

[SteamWake]

Thats not to bad an idea.

You actually dont have to have anything witheld, you do however have to pay it on april 15th.

The hard part is making sure you put enough aside to pay it and not use it for.. I dunno new tires or something.

I think if there was no witholding and people began to see just how much they had to 'set aside' alot of eyes would be opened.

As it is now with the witholding system its almost as if they dont notice. Its a tad insidious.

[mookiemookie]

Quite a bit is invested. That's the money used by employers to expand. And earn more riches off the backs of someone else's labor. But of course, that income is taxed at a more favorable rate (capital gains) than income earned yourself. Why do we value unearned income (which is what dividends and investment gains are classified as) more than earned income by taxing it at a more favorable rate? Kind of goes against those good ol' conservative values of hard work and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.

"Why shouldn't the American people take half my money from me? I took all of it from them." --Edward Albert Filene, founder of Filene's Department Stores, founder of the American Chamber of Commerce.

BTW, while they might have a higher % of the money at any given time, that doesn't mean they use any more government.

Of course they do! A more wealthy person benefits more from laws and government than a poor person. Besides the police, fire, and military protection enjoyed, the richer person has more property to protect and thus uses more government resources (banking and market regulations being one example). Kind of funny that the TEA PARTY screams about taxation without representation (do they? Their message is so muddled I have no idea what it is they're mad at this week....) when with the wealthy, it's just the opposite of taxation without representation - the wealthy have more influence in shaping public policy and laws. Who really runs Washington? The single mother of 4 writing a letter to her representative, or the wealthy donor buying spots at a $1000 a plate fundraiser?

[tater]

I use more of the fire department? I also pay more property tax—that's what it's for. We're talking FEDERAL right now. There is no way I use 100X more of ANYTHING provided by the government. In fact, I use LESS.

INvestment is earning of the backs of someone else? That someone else would have NO JOB AT ALL otherwise. Ask someone about to be laid off if he'd rather have new investors to his employer and a job. What do you think he'd say, "No, I'd rather collect welfare."? Every employee earns more for the business than they are paid (unless the business is terribly mismanaged). That includes the officers. That's the whole idea, otherwise it would be not for profit.

If the owner of Filene's—or anyone else that spouts off about their family being rich and happy to pay—wants, they can elect to pay more. How about all Democrats above 250k a year pay 50% voluntarily? Put their money where their mouth is! Take the moral high ground.

No, we get people like John Kerry who apparently had an effective tax rate of 15% the year he ran.

Sorry, but the country is filled with people living upper middle class lives who pay well over $100,000 a year in income taxes (found a tax calculator, ~100k in tax is 370k AGI). They do not use 10X the government of someone who pays 10k a year and makes 65 grand. They don't use the 6X disparity in income in gov services.

Remember that 2/3 of federal government spending is entitlement programs. 2/3. Welfare, and other non-essential pork is much of the remaining third, where perhaps 1/2 of that (1/6 total spending) is the legitimate expense of defense.

I'm fine with paying more, I expect to. Having idiots in government spend more and more, then raise my taxes above what they are, THAT POs me. I pay enough, trust me.

[Platapus]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3144

An interesting interview on where our federal taxes go.

[tater]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3144

An interesting interview on where our federal taxes go.

Nice, but it's wrong.

According to the CBO for 2009:

Discretionary Spending: 1,237.0 B$
Programmatic Spending (entitlements): 2,288.7 B$
Net Interest: 187.3 B$
Offsetting receipts: -194.7 B$
total spending: 3,518.2 B$

Entitlements are 65% of spending.

Defense was 655.8, so 18.6% (close tot he claim above).

That only leaves ~16% for everything else.

[Platapus]

Well the CBO should know. :D

[mookiemookie]

I use more of the fire department? I also pay more property tax—that's what it's for. We're talking FEDERAL right now. There is no way I use 100X more of ANYTHING provided by the government.

The point is richer people have more at stake and are thus more reliant on federal protection to keep that safe. I threw in police and fire because those are funded primarily by local and state tax monies, but the idea remains the same if you restrict it to national defense if you want to keep it solely from a federal standpoint.

[Stealth Hunter]

While there are certainly some idiots like those sign holders, what about Obama supporters in Che shirts? Or Obama campaign offices with a Che poster?

Just as idiotic. Whoever implied they weren't? First, he's not at all like Ernesto (a Marxist), and second, how are these supporters of him in Che Guevara shirts at all related to the topic of racism which we were discussing (Che was a man who campaigned against racism and discrimination in the lower Americas LONG before the United States passed the Civil Rights Act of 1965 and the Voting Rights Act of 1964)?

That would have been like a McCain rally or office with some iconic, but minor Nazi figure on shirts.

Depends; who is this "iconic, but minor Nazi figure" you speak of that they'd put on shirts or a flag or poster?

I've seen baby onesies with Che on them.

My god what's the world coming to when the Time Magazine shot of the face of an Argentinian Marxist revolutionary who's been dead 43 years appears on a piece of clothing? Why they have no right to do this without receiving justified scrutiny. Out of my own curiosity, is this mentality limited just to Che, or all political bits of clothing- like these Republican and Democrat baby t-shirts:

http://www.lalababyboutique.com/lil-republican-baby-t-shirt-550-prd1.htm

http://www.lalababyboutique.com/lil-democrat-baby-t-shirt-549-prd1.htm

:06:

You can guess the political bumper sticker on THAT hybrid, can't you?

"Warning! IN CASE OF RAPTURE, THIS CAR WILL BE UNMANNED"?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_B1LlYh6iKqs/Ss09ULIhPiI/AAAAAAAAA6Q/dN7hger-tSY/s400/funny-bumper-sticker-8.jpg

Obama as a monkey? I've see the Bush/Monkey images,

We all have.

what's the difference, we're all evolved from common ancestors, both Obama and Bush are Homo sapiens, after all?

Chimpanzees are not monkeys. There is a difference. We are more closely related to chimps... but then again you knew that right?

"Monkey" has been used as a racial slur towards blacks in particular for centuries. People once believed, because of their high cranium, blacks were close cousins to primates. Look into the 18th and 19th century eugenic-like beliefs people held about Africans sometime. You know that, I know that. "Porch monkeys", "Bo-bos" (Bo-bo the Monkey, the zoo sideshow?), "Changos" (Spanish for monkey), "monkeyboys", "monos" (common Old English term for monkeys)... do I really need to go on with the things they call them?

If you didn't know any of this, I feel sorry for how sheltered you must have been as a child.

And now, this is the part where you say "What about the whites?" Well it's not right to call them things like "cracker" or "whiteboys" either. Just as it's not right to call Middle Easterners "sand n***ers", Indians "Jalals", Hispanics "Pacos", etc. But this was not started as an argument by me over which side does more, or which side is doing it- because they're both getting minority numbers that are doing it. To deny that they are to claim that only one side is doing it is nothing short of ignorant.

The problem is that people combed huge rallies, and we get to see every scumbag poster on the news as if it was most of them, or even a large %.

Evidently the people around them didn't care too much; otherwise, they would have stopped them- or at the least said "Hey man, we don't do racism here." But they haven't. That's what I resent more than anything.

During the Bush Admin,

We're not talking about the Bush Administration; this is the Obama Administration...

OTOH, the news breathlessly covered anti-war protests, and never once mentioned that the sponsor of many big protests—ANSWER—is in fact a communist organization.

What are you on about now?

The didn;t have a problem with burning Bush in effigy, nor were they overly concerned about posters of W with a crosshair on him.

No, you're exactly right, they didn't. And neither did the folks burning and hanging Obama effigies, Sarah Palin effigies, and Hillary Clinton effigies. What's your point?

Anyone here every read the huffpo, or dailykos?

No, I refrain from it as often as I can. I stick to the Associated Press.

If they are not smart enough to disable comments, check it out when the news reports some, heck, ANY Republican as sick or going to the doctor. Comments overflow with death wishes.

It's ridiculous how these people are acting, let alone the scare tactics their higher-ups are using. Concentration camps, death panels, the end of freedom, the destruction of the whole country... could they overreact a little more I wonder? Funnily enough, all other industrialized nations in the Western hemisphere have universal health care and have managed to avoid these things... unless our neighbors to the north and south are conspiring...:haha:

Tater... you have to look at group psychology

its only wrong when its the other guys doing it

It's this exact idiotic mentality that keeps this tunnel a'churnin' (nevermind the very irony of this statement). One person on one side acts ugly, then another person on another side thinks it's okay to be just as moronic and do it too, returning the favor. BOTH sides should be gearing up (Tea Party members and anti-Tea Party members) to deal with these vermin waving around Confederate flags and whatnot. No sense at all in it.

I have heard enough of this racism crap

Good; then you can start helping us to get rid of these bastards and finally put an end to their shenanigans.

how many of those racists are "planted"?

Well, GR, since you're the first person to imply some/most of them were planted, why don't you tell us with sources for your answers instead of playing this tired old "It's all fake" card. Do you really think you can get an organization like this going (let alone at this kind of strength in numbers) and not have racism pop up into it? Of course not. It's a statistical certainty, let alone when a black man is president- not to say that white presidents don't get as much flak from black racists. To say "There is no racism entering into this issue; there's no such thing in politics" is an absurdity of common knowledge/sense.

one has to wonder.

Why don't you find out already since you were the first to suggest they were?

but you're right... Bush has been monkey imaged plenty enough himself... like you said, whats the difference?

He's white; the racial slur comparing blacks to monkeys has been exclusively as such. And I explained why already to Tater.

well

Answer one: There isnt a difference

Between the slurs, there is. You wouldn't call an Irish-American guy a "sand n***er", just as you wouldn't call an Asian a "mottisa" (this term refers to the African "indentured servants" of England and the Colonies, when they would offer their owners "More tea, sir?").

Answer two: Bush is white, so you can say or write or doodle anything you want about him and its ok

I can't call him a "cracker" or a "mouse" without being racist, because these are slur terms specifically reserved for whites; just like you can't call a black man a "n***er" or a "monkey" without being racist- because these are slurs specifically reserved for their race.

which answer you go with depends on whether you lean left or right.

But moreover on what race you are, because these are racial slurs- not political slurs. Such racial slurs may be inspired by politics, but they are not (by their very use of terminology and definition) political slurs. I suggest you pick up a dictionary or consult Google to get a better look at what the differences are. With that said, slurs are slurs; there's no need for anyone to use them.

First off they're not the cohesive and organized national group you think they are and their very narrow agenda is going to attract support from a wide range of people. That doesn't mean the movement is suddenly endorsing anything beyond the the issues it was created to address.

Well they are a nationally coordinated group of protesters that are (amongst other things) united in their belief in Fiscal Conservatism and are generally opposed to the federal government... in that regards I consider them to be as such. But on, I personally have found their agenda to not be narrow. Like I said, they just belief in the political theory of Fiscal Conservatism- they don't really offer any solutions to the things they disagree with. Like the health care bill. The general clamor was "It's going to ruin us. It's the end of freedom as we know it. We have to repeal it to keep Obama from destroying the country!" While that's all fair and good, they did nothing to suggest changes that could be made to the bill Congress was working on and instead took a stance of "THROW IT ALL OUT! IT'S SOCIALISM!" The problem I have seen time and time again with these kinds of people is that if the legislation doesn't fix the issue it's tackling immediately, then they're automatically opposed to it. They want quick fixes to these types of problems, but the fact of the matter is there are no quick solutions to the issue of health care. Or more relevantly, the economy. Solutions proposed and passed by the government that have turned the stock market around to where it was have been (particularly the stimulus package) ridiculed because they did not fix the issue of employment immediately. Now we're recovering, more than we were anyway, but it's still not solving the problem en masse. When you have this kind of economic meltdown, how can you honestly expect anything to be created that will all of a sudden just solve all the problems? It's a mystery to me how they get this mentality.

Secondly, I'll agree with you that some of those posters you show are way over the top, but the lefts crocodile tears about it don't impress me after 8 years of their engaging in the same type of thing.

It's not just a "left" thing, though. It's not just a "right" thing either. Simply put, we should have no tolerance for it at all, no matter what side does it. It's just plain unnecessary, it provokes staunch intolerance for one another, it makes us look like a bunch of senseless, indecent hooligans, and there's no justifiable reason why we don't join together and stop it from happening- at least in these protests-- for both sides.

For every picture you posted I can show you one made about Bush that was just as bad or worse.

Go for it.

However given the lefts history of using agent provocateurs, one has to wonder whether the people holding them are real Tea Partyers or some divisive ass like that Jason Levin trying to marginalize and discredit the voices of American citizens exercising their constitutional rights.

Well would you and GoldenRivet care to show us that they were? There's no reason to assume they're plants. There really isn't. I keep on hearing claims (not just here necessarily) that they are, but that's it. No citations, no sources, nothing outside of baseless claims. So why say they are if you can't show/don't definitively know they are?

We'll find out what the American people think about it come November.

True. Personally, I'm more worried about what they know/don't know (in terms of knowledge, that is) than what their opinions are. Perhaps this is just a trend that will die like the others we've had before. I hope so before it gets serious.

[CaptainHaplo]

There's no reason to assume they're plants. There really isn't. I keep on hearing claims (not just here necessarily) that they are, but that's it. No citations, no sources, nothing outside of baseless claims

Well had you paid much attention to what the focus of this was - an attempt to bring down the tea party - you would have noted that the person advocating such was in fact advocating exactly what is being discussed - infiltrating the gatherings, acting like an ass to present the group as extremist, etc - as well as "data mining" - trying to get people's names, addresses, SSN's etc.

He is currently under investigation by the school board.

http://www.examiner.com/x-42345-Tea-Party-Examiner~y2010m4d15-Oregon-teacher-and-creator-of-Crash-The-Tea-Party-under-investigation-by-school-board

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/15/oregon-probes-teacher-determined-demolish-tea-party/

To say its simply a "claim" when the reality is that it has been advocated publicly by tea party opposition - shows how naive you are. If its being shouted from the rooptops - its been spoken on in the alleys for some time.

Now - should both sides grow the heck up. Sure they should. None of us can hold our breath for that, unfortunately. Its also interesting to note that the call is for people to infiltrate and make them appear as something they are not - if they were "racists" or "extremists" - it wouldn't take people to infiltrate them now would it?

On the issue of Che shirts.... the issue is that they publicly show support for those who represent and favored a specific system - yet they also claim that "oh we are not for socialism, or communism, or violently repressing opposition, etc".... Thats called talking out of both sides of the mouth.....

[GoldenRivet]

Well, GR, since you're the first person to imply some/most of them were planted...

I did not imply that they were planted.

I only raised the question of wondering IF any of them were... meaning there is the possibility that some were or were not planted. I did not deal in any absolute as your statement there implies.

for example... I did not say "437 of them were planted." :up:

I can't call him a "cracker" or a "mouse" without being racist, because these are slur terms specifically reserved for whites; just like you can't call a black man a "n***er"

case in point.

explain to me one thing... if the terms you used in your example here are mutually offensive racist terms...

why does the word "******" have to be "starred out" but the word "cracker" doesnt? :hmmm:

digest that a minute and then get back to me

edit: apparently neither of them are automatically edited by Subsim... so this means YOU edited the terms yourself.

so why the double standard?

(you know... the one i have been talking about all along)

[tater]

There have been documented discussions about plants.

Regardless, the Bush Administration IS relevant. If those in the political, talking head class complain about the Tea Party, they open themselves up to examination on how they responded to anti-W protests.

The fact is quite simply that nothing was investigated WRT anti-war, anti-W protests. Nothing at all. It was taken at face value—it was nationally organized and sponsored—more so than the tea party stuff. By ANSWER, which as a commie organization implicitly supports the murder of over 100 million people. Being communist is no different than being nazi—except that the commies have a higher body count (hard as that is to comprehend—the horror of nazism is beyond human capacity to really understand, then triple or quadruple it... yeesh).

The tea parties are actually far more grass-roots. It gets talked about nationally on the radio, but it's not like it's being organized by some office in DC.

I didn't name a specific nazi figure, because all the well known ones are clearly worse than Che. Of course Che is only well-known because he's become a popular icon, even though he is in fact a stand in for soviet era expansionist communism—that murdered people by the tens of millions. So pick some camp commandant loved by other murdering nazis, then spend decades using him as a pop icon and get back to me. Course you can;t because people rightly hate nazis, but wrongly give commies a pass. <shrug>

I named Che not in reference to racism. He might have been ant-racism, but as a commie, he was pro-mass murder. That's the thing about communist murder, it was not aimed at some race or other factor. It was the party office calling up a village and saying, "execute 100 enemies of the state by a week from next tuesday." It was random in many cases (read The Black Book fo Communism, or Death By Government for more—the former has a low figure for Soviet murder in the mid 30 millions, Rummel figured on closer to 60M in DBG). I also mentioned it because there are images of Obama campaign offices with Che posters on the wall.

Regarding Pan troglodytes, is your suggestion that it is OK to call Obama a chimp because we share more genetic material with them than we do with monkeys?

How about it's either OK to call a human being a chimp or monkey as a slur, or it's not?

[August]

Well would you and GoldenRivet care to show us that they were? There's no reason to assume they're plants. There really isn't. I keep on hearing claims (not just here necessarily) that they are, but that's it. No citations, no sources, nothing outside of baseless claims. So why say they are if you can't show/don't definitively know they are?

Well that's odd, given I mean that this thread is about someone recruiting for that exact type of thing.

But this is nothing new. Remember that Cincinnati Dem Congressman who claimed that Tea Party supporters threw a rock through his window for instance? Turns out it didn't actually happen. http://www.examiner.com/x-16044-Christianity--Politics-Examiner~y2010m3d26-No-rocks-through-Driehaus-Cincinnati-office-window (http://www.examiner.com/x-16044-Christianity--Politics-Examiner%7Ey2010m3d26-No-rocks-through-Driehaus-Cincinnati-office-window) That hasn't stopped the MSM from continuing to play up the story as fact.

Then there are the claims by certain Democrat Congressmen that Tea Party supporters were spitting and hurling racial insults and threats at them on the Capitol steps, yet amazingly not one of these incidents is caught on tape in spite of about a gazillion cameras and microphones right there manned by people just hoping to record something like that for the evening news.

Come to think about it why were those congress critters walking through the crowd at all? They certainly didn't have to do that. It sounds to me like they were trying to incite a response like that and when it didn't happen they just made it up.

As a matter of fact the only violence relating to the Tea Party that has been caught on tape is where Democrat supporters beat up that guy who was handing out Gadsen flags in Ft. Lauderdale.

... before it gets serious.I think it's too late for that. The Democrats went out of their way to poison the political landscape during the Bush administration and now those chickens have come home to roost.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Hmmm...I'm curious about something: is it an amazing coincidence that the Tea Partiers only appeared after a Democrat became President? Where were they when Bush was blowing billions?

I know the official talking point is that they are against governmental spending during all administrations, and yet..they only mobilized with Obama.

Somehow, I think if a Republican President were elected, and he (PLEASE be a he, or at least not an idiot) was forced to spend billions for whatever reason, they'd be as quiet as a tomb about it.

[GoldenRivet]

I could say it was because the masses felt threatened by terrorism.

After 9/11 fear gripped the nation... and terror was redefined for America, it crept into our psyche as a nation.

Bush (actually congress) - in many minds - was spending billions trying to "keep us safe" from this deadly enemy.

Obama on the other hand.

He is changing many aspects of our personal lives, with one government intrusion at a time.

thus the organization of TEA parties.

one thing ill add...

something like a TEA party organization doesnt crop up over night... they come from people being more and more pissed off for years... sometimes more than a decade.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

I could say it was because the masses felt threatened by terrorism.

After 9/11 fear gripped the nation... and terror was redefined for America, it crept into our psyche as a nation.

Bush (actually congress) - in many minds - was spending billions trying to "keep us safe" from this deadly enemy.

Obama on the other hand.

He is changing many aspects of our personal lives, with one government intrusion at a time.

Do you have no problem with corporations invading your life?

[GoldenRivet]

Do you have no problem with corporations invading your life?

yes... specifically when my government comes out and says "You have to do business with XXX corporation or pay a fine and go to jail."

;)

[Aramike]

Hmmm...I'm curious about something: is it an amazing coincidence that the Tea Partiers only appeared after a Democrat became President? Where were they when Bush was blowing billions?That's such a garbage argument.

Even if Bush was "blowing billions" in unjustified spending the core difference is that he wasn't invading the private sector nor was he taking over 1/6 of our economy in ANYTHING.

But that being said, the reason that argument doesn't fly is simple: what justifies throwing good money after bad?

Oh, and have you not been informed that Obama has already outspent Bush's ***8*** YEARS? Oh, and wasn't Obama a Senator for some of that time?Somehow, I think if a Republican President were elected, and he (PLEASE be a he, or at least not an idiot) was forced to spend billions for whatever reason, they'd be as quiet as a tomb about it. I cannot believe that you're so blind as to see the fundamental difference in the spending by the different administrations.

I'm pretty sure that if a Republican attempted to do anything akin to what Obama has done, there would be a similar response.

But here, let me put this in bold for you so maybe you'll really take this point in:

It's not simply that the money is being spent which is the problem, it's WHAT THE MONEY IS BEING SPENT ON.

[August]

Hmmm...I'm curious about something: is it an amazing coincidence that the Tea Partiers only appeared after a Democrat became President? Where were they when Bush was blowing billions?
I know the official talking point is that they are against governmental spending during all administrations, and yet..they only mobilized with Obama.

Somehow, I think if a Republican President were elected, and he (PLEASE be a he, or at least not an idiot) was forced to spend billions for whatever reason, they'd be as quiet as a tomb about it.

Well I'm curious about something too. What happened to all those anti-patriot act protesters of the past decade? Is it an amazing coincidence that they have suddenly become quiet as a tomb now that the Democrats, many of them the same ones who voted for the act, are now in power?

It's funny to see you mention Bush spending billions when your Democrats have already spent Trillions and are pushing to spend way more.

[mookiemookie]

yes... specifically when my government comes out and says "You have to do business with XXX corporation or pay a fine and go to jail."

;)

Just like when the states do that for car insurance? Gub'mint is Gub'mint.

[GoldenRivet]

Just like when the states do that for car insurance? Gub'mint is Gub'mint.

not really.

You see living is not a privilege its a right...

driving is not a right, its a privilege.

and driving also involves operating a potentially deadly piece of machinery on public roadways.

By not buying vehicle insurance - you put everyone including yourself in direct risk.

by not buying health insurance - you put noone but yourself at direct risk.

thus the two requirements to buy insurance are not equally comprable.


Edit:

mookie... come on man. You know that "car insurance is required" argument holds ZERO water.

[August]

mookie... come on man. You know that "car insurance is required" argument holds ZERO water.

Exactly. I might add that one only needs a vehicle license to drive on public roadways. On your own property you don't need anything.

[GoldenRivet]

Exactly. I might add that one only needs a vehicle license to drive on public roadways. On your own property you don't need anything.

in Texas you must carry "proof of financial responsibility" ie insurance.

but it only has to be liability insurance or some crap.

so a savvy shopper could get insurance for just a fist full of dollars per month.

[UnderseaLcpl]

in Texas you must carry "proof of financial responsibility" ie insurance.

but it only has to be liability insurance or some crap.

so a savvy shopper could get insurance for just a fist full of dollars per month.

That's true. I always buy liability only because I only buy used vehicles that are cheap. I have a picture of my last vehicle and insurance purchase:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o264/charlie143james/clinteastwood.jpg

[GoldenRivet]

nice.

[Tribesman]

edit: apparently neither of them are automatically edited by Subsim... so this means YOU edited the terms yourself.
so why the double standard?

Because when one person says one word, it cannot be a racist slur and when another says that same word it is. When the first person uses the other word it is a racist slur and when the other person uses that word it isn't.
Amazing that isn't it. So simple but apparently beyond your ken.
Though I suspect you do understand it and are just making a drama to try and show you have a point to make when you don't really.


Exactly. I might add that one only needs a vehicle license to drive on public roadways. On your own property you don't need anything.
So you don't need health insurance if you have your own personal hospital and doctors you have bought yourself.


By not buying vehicle insurance - you put everyone including yourself in direct risk.

By "direct risk" you must mean financial risk in the event of an accident.

by not buying health insurance - you put noone but yourself at direct risk.

Since you must have meant financial risk and its tax payers and those with private insurance that pay for the uninsured in healthcare then they are putting everyone at risk.

[SteamWake]

Obama finds the protesters amusing..




MIAMI (AP) - President Barack Obama said Thursday he's amused by the anti-tax tea party protests that have been taking place around Tax Day.
Obama told a fundraiser in Miami that he's cut taxes, contrary to the claims of protesters.

"You would think they'd be saying thank you," he said.
At that, many in the crowd at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts stood and yelled, "Thank you!"


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100416/D9F3SNCG1.html

[tater]

The only required vehicle insurance is to financially protect other drivers from your actions.

The only analogous health insurance would be to get insurance that covers someone else should you infect them with something.

The new law of course means that they've created an incentive to pay the minimal fine, avoiding insurance. Since preexisting conditions are covered, you can wait until you are sick, then buy real insurance after the fact. This is happening in MA already apparently.

[GoldenRivet]

The only required vehicle insurance is to financially protect other drivers from your actions.

The only analogous health insurance would be to get insurance that covers someone else should you infect them with something.

The new law of course means that they've created an incentive to pay the minimal fine, avoiding insurance. Since preexisting conditions are covered, you can wait until you are sick, then buy real insurance after the fact. This is happening in MA already apparently.

correct.

[August]

I have a picture of my last vehicle and insurance purchase:



What kind of mileage you get out of that Eastwood? :D

[SteamWake]

Still trying to stay on topic.


An Oregon teacher who announced his intention to "dismantle and demolish the Tea Party" has been placed on administrative leave until his school district finishes its investigation into whether his political activity crossed the line


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/16/teacher-sought-demolish-tea-party-placed-leave-school/

[Tribesman]

The only required vehicle insurance is to financially protect other drivers from your actions.

The only analogous health insurance would be to get insurance that covers someone else should you infect them with something.

Who picks up the bill for the uninsured in hospitals when they don't pay?

[tater]

Who picks up the bill for the uninsured in hospitals when they don't pay?

The insured. I'd be fine with fixing up the uninsured, then making them indentured servants til it's paid off if you prefer. The difference is that this is fair, it's passed on to everyone. A business pays 20% more for care, then passes the costs to the customer (as all costs are passed on when cost of sales increases). What you prefer is to make a tiny fraction of the population pay far more, instead.


BTW, here in NM, even though insurance is required for cars, a substantial % of drivers are uninsured. Many pick up insurance for a month, get their registration, then let it lapse. This WILL happen with the idiotic new law, BTW. Get the required insurance, then don't pay the premium.

As a result, anyone with more than 2 brain cells at the very least also get "uninsured motorist" coverage.

Bottom line is that no one goes without care in the US. Even under the current system we have better outcomes, too. Including all the uninsured. Considerably better outcomes, actually.

[Tribesman]

The difference is that this is fair, it's passed on to everyone.
You had better explain that as it isn't passed on to everyone.
If someone doesn't have insurance they are not going to get the passed on costs from the insurance company, likewise with the other source of payment to the hospitals, if they don't pay tax they are not getting the cost passed on.

What you prefer is to make a tiny fraction of the population pay far more, instead.

Which tiny fraction? the fraction that don't pay at the moment or the much larger group that already pay for the fraction that don't pay.

Many pick up insurance for a month, get their registration, then let it lapse. This WILL happen with the idiotic new law, BTW. Get the required insurance, then don't pay the premium.

Thats easily fixed. Its hard to keep up to date with cars as there are so many variables, with people its a lot easier.

[tater]

Sorry, I cannot make heads or tails of your first point.

The uninsured are treated in the US. Show up at a hospital, and you get treated, period.

So uninsured shows up, and the hospital eats 100% of that care. This is not paid for by taxpayers except in the special case of subsidized hospitals (typically State hospitals, often associated with med schools (which helps because they have slave labor (Residents))).

As a private business, of course, they "eat" nothing. This free care is a cost of sales, and they make every effort to pass it on through their negotiated contracts with insurance providers. Hospital says to BCBS, "look, you want your Blue Cross, Blue Shield patients to have access to a hospital here in NM, right? We have too many uninsured, we need better than our previous 117% of medicare. Pay us 133% of Medicare or pound sand."

BCBS has a choice, pay more for care (which they will pass on to their NM customers as increased premiums), or use another hospital. If the other hospital is seen as undesirable in the State, they'll lose market share to other insurers. (one hospital did just this and no longer takes BCBS—and the 2 that do are the U, and a really crappy hospital. The U is great, but then you get to sit next to gangbangers and other scum while you wait to see your doc. Many switch to the other hospital's own health plan).

The insured pay a "tax" for the uninsured right now in the form of increased premiums—though some of the uninsured simply pay cash as well. I should say uncollected, uninsured care.

The new suggestion is for the taxpayer to pick up the tab. Since the vast majority of tax payers pay no meaningful contribution of tax collected, that means the solution is to make the top tier who are already paying for everything else the government does pay for this, too. The current thing is a 3% tax on people making over 250k. Assuming it is on income OVER 250k, then if you make 500k, you pay another $7500 in tax on top of the $165,000+ you already pay in federal taxes.

[Tribesman]

Sorry, I cannot make heads or tails of your first point.

I thought so.
So uninsured shows up, and the hospital eats 100% of that care.
You know that isn't true.
This is not paid for by taxpayers except in the special case of subsidized hospitals
All ERs recieve government funding.

(typically State hospitals, often associated with med schools (which helps because they have slave labor (Residents))).


Residents, thats doctors who have done their exams but cannot yet recieve their final licence to practice unsupervised.
BTW med schools and doctors training are tax payer funded .

The new suggestion is for the taxpayer to pick up the tab. Since the vast majority of tax payers pay no meaningful contribution of tax collected, that means the solution is to make the top tier who are already paying for everything else the government does pay for this, too.
Thats the way the world works.
I suppose you could go strictly back to the times of the constitution and make the taxes people pay largely dependant on what they own, which of course means the wealthy pick up nearly all the bill.

[CaptainHaplo]

Amazing how people who can't win the arguement try to turn it into some other issue.

This isn't about the healthcare plan - its about the fact that the country - at least the vast majority of it - sees this as a horrible idea. The reality is that many people - of various political leanings - feel this way - and choose the tea parties as a way to be seen and heard. The fact that those who support such policies cannot take the heat means they must find - and encourage - underhanded mudslinging to discredit those who speak what the majority feels.

After all - if the group was "racist" and "homophobic" on its own - there would be no need to "infiltrate" them and then act EXTREME to provide an example of the "evil tea parties". But those who hold a "left is best at any cost" view can't argue that - so they try and divert the arguement - first by posting a bunch of pictures of people making fun of Obama - and then going into car insurance and health care.....

If it wasn't so pathetic it would be funnier.

[tater]

You are as wrong about government ER funding as you are about the requirement for foreign medical grads to do a residency in the US regardless of residency training abroad.

Residents are subsidized to the tune of more than they get paid, presumably to cover their education. The vast majority of US hospitals have no residents.

[Tribesman]

You are as wrong about government ER funding as you are about the requirement for foreign medical grads to do a residency in the US regardless of residency training abroad.


ERs get government funding at a federal level and to varying degrees at state level also. One of the issues up for debate by your politicians and hospital boards for years is the shortfall in the government funding
And I never said that about the requirements, what I said was foriegn graduates in some states can take their part 3 exam without a residency.
Can you recall your response to that information?

Residents are subsidized to the tune of more than they get paid, presumably to cover their education.
And to what tune are they subsidised before they get to the Residency stage?

If it wasn't so pathetic it would be funnier.
Face it, the tea parties are funny because they are so pathetic.