|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
 Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:38 pm Post subject: If Obama doesn't get re-elected, I'm joining the Tea Party! |
 |
|
You heard it here first...
If Obama doesn't get re-elected, I'm joining the Tea Party! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If Obama doesn't get re-elected, the Tea Parties will stop existing. They're nothing more than a collection of useful idiots being used by the American Right to rabble-rouse. Once Republicans are back in power, they'll have served their purpose. The media will stop reporting on them, Fox News will stop promoting them, and since they're no longer getting attention, they'll go back to their lives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why would you wait to see if Obama gets re-elected? Obama is the worst, most pro-Wall Street president of all time, right along side Bush.
Which Tea Party? The one started by Ron Paul supporters and libertarians who want lower taxes, less government, and to end the Fed? Or the one hijacked by the Republican party, Glenn Beck, and Fox News? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, as a fiscal conservative....it's a basic fact that Republicans SPEND significantly more...
But, I'm afraid FOX (the poster) is right...if Obama doesn't get re-elected, you can count on all coverage of the Tea Parties to simply cease to exist...and the movements will just stop.
Then Republicans will go back to another MASSIVE MASSIVE spending spree like they have every single time they get in office over the last 30 years. That Bush Administration spending spree was a doozy...even far surpassing Reagon's monsterous spending habits.
I just don't want to see another of those administrations re-occuring a couple years from now, or it'll completely destroy us as a nation even more than we've already become since Bush...so hoping Obama can hang in there!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A recent survey of two tea party events in DC and NYC showed them to be divided evenly between Ron Paul libertarians and Sara Palin so-cons.
So Tiger Beer, assuming that Ron Paul isn't the next president, you will be able to join the Tea Parties. They will still exist. They'll just be about half the size as they were the day before the election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tiger Beer wrote: |
Well, as a fiscal conservative....it's a basic fact that Republicans SPEND significantly more...
But, I'm afraid FOX (the poster) is right...if Obama doesn't get re-elected, you can count on all coverage of the Tea Parties to simply cease to exist...and the movements will just stop.
Then Republicans will go back to another MASSIVE MASSIVE spending spree like they have every single time they get in office over the last 30 years. That Bush Administration spending spree was a doozy...even far surpassing Reagon's monsterous spending habits.
I just don't want to see another of those administrations re-occuring a couple years from now, or it'll completely destroy us as a nation even more than we've already become since Bush...so hoping Obama can hang in there!! |
Dude, what are you talking about? Obama has put our country on the hook for more money than all presidents in history combined (even including Bush, who had been the worst president to date). His banker bailouts amount to many, many trillions (a blank check basically, and we're not even allowed to know where the money goes). He's expanding the wars. He's forcing insanely expensive, phony universal healthcare (just a huge bailout for insurance companies, who wrote the bill) upon us. And now they're talking about ramming a value added tax down our throats. We are already bankrupt, and he's still not through yet!
Whether you agree with his pro-Wall Street policies or not, Obama IS the most fiscally wasteful president of all time. Straight up fact. And believe me, it's no defense of Bush to point this out.
You are right though - if the Republicans get re-elected, they'll no doubt do all they can to surpass even Obama in bankrupting our nation and handing it over to the banks. They only get bolder in their criminality each time around. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What exactly is the historical parallel supposed to be with the Tea Parties anyway?
Taxation without Representation? Um, elected representatives.
Protest of mercantilist policies (modern incarnations of the Navigation Acts/Molasses Act and Sugar Act)? Its not exactly America's highly selective "free trade" policy towards other nations that is cheesing these people.
Are the authorities able to enter homes/vehicles merely on suspicion, and without probable cause, to tax and prevent smuggling (Writ of Assistances) followed by trials where the defendants did not have access to a jury? No, the Tea Party isn't about that, either.
What about a reaction to overhanded policing measures by authorities enforcing any of the above that resulted in several deaths (the Boston Massacre)? Definitely not.
No, the Tea Party is about a partisan opposition to a legally and legitimately elected President. Its main demand seems to be that President Obama and Congress not raise taxes, although more than half of the movement supports (not merely supported in the past, actually still supports) the spendthrift Bush administration. In other words, they wanted their big government spending via: Iraq, Afghanistan, the national security state, TARP, corporatism, tax cuts for the rich. But they don't want their big government spending via: economic stimulus (to repair the damage from Bush), TARP (???), health care, environmental protection.
Well, I agree with them about the stimulus. But beyond that, they are an utterly confused mob or a pack of cynical parasites wishing to avoid paying their way, or most likely, some combination of the two. I find their analogy to American history half-offensive and half-idiotic. I find their hypocrisy deep and fundamentally contradictory. I find their partisanship utterly grotesque. Many of these people are the same people who supported Bush for eight years, or at least until his polling numbers hit their depths in 2008. Grotesque, grotesque, grotesque. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
A recent survey of two tea party events in DC and NYC showed them to be divided evenly between Ron Paul libertarians and Sara Palin so-cons.
So Tiger Beer, assuming that Ron Paul isn't the next president, you will be able to join the Tea Parties. They will still exist. They'll just be about half the size as they were the day before the election. |
RON PAUL will never become President. I like the guy, being fiscally conservative and all.
But...Republicans absolutely HATE him. Generally Republicans TALK 'fiscal responsibility'..but will never WALK THE WALK.
Sarah Palin is ideal for that party...she's the Bush equivalent. She'll never walk the walk, and always talk the talk. That's really what the Republican Party is ALL about.
I think when 2012 rolls around...both of them will get slaughtered by typical Republican slaughter machines who'll do each other in...and some weirdo like Bobby Jindal will be touted as the next great thing.
Meanwhile, if Republicans get into office, and if any Tea Partiers complain about fiscal irresponsibility at that time...they'll be deemed un-American and said to be infilterated by liberal weirdos...by pretty much all the American media sources - especially talk radio and fox news.
You heard it here first, folks!  GUARANTEED!
Last edited by Tiger Beer on Sat May 01, 2010 7:40 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
Obama has put our country on the hook for more money than all presidents in history combined (even including Bush, who had been the worst president to date). His banker bailouts amount to many, many trillions (a blank check basically, and we're not even allowed to know where the money goes). He's expanding the wars. He's forcing insanely expensive, phony universal healthcare (just a huge bailout for insurance companies, who wrote the bill) upon us. And now they're talking about ramming a value added tax down our throats. We are already bankrupt, and he's still not through yet!
Whether you agree with his pro-Wall Street policies or not, Obama IS the most fiscally wasteful president of all time. Straight up fact. And believe me, it's no defense of Bush to point this out.
You are right though - if the Republicans get re-elected, they'll no doubt do all they can to surpass even Obama in bankrupting our nation and handing it over to the banks. They only get bolder in their criminality each time around. |
That was worth repeating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
What exactly is the historical parallel supposed to be with the Tea Parties anyway?
Taxation without Representation? Um, elected representatives. |
Um, the Federal Reserve (whom we are forced by IRS thugs to pay our income tax to) is NOT elected. It's a privately owned banking cartel and it has bankrupted our country, in addition to causing both the Great Depression and the Greatest Depression (which we are undergoing at present). It is probably the most evil institution ever. The banks have stolen trillions (which we pay interest on) and we don't even get to know where the money goes, simply because Bernanke doesn't want to tell us. Inflation is also a tax.
| Quote: |
No, the Tea Party is about a partisan opposition to a legally and legitimately elected President. Its main demand seems to be that President Obama and Congress not raise taxes, although more than half of the movement supports (not merely supported in the past, actually still supports) the spendthrift Bush administration. In other words, they wanted their big government spending via: Iraq, Afghanistan, the national security state, TARP, corporatism, tax cuts for the rich. But they don't want their big government spending via: economic stimulus (to repair the damage from Bush), TARP (???), health care, environmental protection.
Well, I agree with them about the stimulus. But beyond that, they are an utterly confused mob or a pack of cynical parasites wishing to avoid paying their way, or most likely, some combination of the two. I find their analogy to American history half-offensive and half-idiotic. I find their hypocrisy deep and fundamentally contradictory. I find their partisanship utterly grotesque. Many of these people are the same people who supported Bush for eight years, or at least until his polling numbers hit their depths in 2008. Grotesque, grotesque, grotesque.
|
Are you even aware that the modern Tea Party movement started out at Ron Paul rallies? None of your above post applies, unless you are talking about the phony movement started by Glenn Beck (and now Sarah Palin and whole mainline GOP) that decided to hijack the Tea Party name. It's just a sick joke, but I think most people who don't rely on the mainstream media and Fox News can tell the difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
What exactly is the historical parallel supposed to be with the Tea Parties anyway?
Taxation without Representation? Um, elected representatives. |
Um, the Federal Reserve (whom we are forced by IRS thugs to pay our income tax to) is NOT elected. It's a privately owned banking cartel and it has bankrupted our country, in addition to causing both the Great Depression and the Greatest Depression (which we are undergoing at present). It is probably the most evil institution ever. The banks have stolen trillions (which we pay interest on) and we don't even get to know where the money goes, simply because Bernanke doesn't want to tell us. Inflation is also a tax. |
I welcome this section of your post. Even if we were to regard the Federal Reserve as 'the most evil institution ever,' it was still established by an act of Congress, is subject to the same basic regulations and limits as other independent Federal agencies, and its terms of existence and accountability may be modified at Congress' discretion. The power to tax is certainly the power to destroy, but in this case, it is held within the hands of represented officials and those entrusted with the task by represented officials. The analogy to the circumstances of the original Tea Party, is at best weak.
| visitorq wrote: |
| Are you even aware that the modern Tea Party movement started out at Ron Paul rallies? None of your above post applies, unless you are talking about the phony movement started by Glenn Beck (and now Sarah Palin and whole mainline GOP) that decided to hijack the Tea Party name. It's just a sick joke, but I think most people who don't rely on the mainstream media and Fox News can tell the difference. |
The germination of the movement doesn't matter so much as what the Tea Party represents now, so I concede that part of the argument. Meanwhile, you have conceded that Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and much of the mainline GOP have since joined the movement. I don't rely nearly as much on the MSM as many others do, although its hard to say exactly what constitutes mainstream media.
Lastly, let me address the passionate libertarianism. I get where you're coming from. Your ideas even make some sense. I even sympathize somewhat that in the American two-party system, the ideas can't be viable until compromises are made with the nat'l security cons and the social cons that eventually water down the necessary intensity of the reforms.
But none of that exactly saves the Tea Party movement. The name its adopted reflects its hysterical hyperbole and those within the movement reflect its hypocrisy. If this is Obama's primary opposition, then he will win, again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 5:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
What exactly is the historical parallel supposed to be with the Tea Parties anyway?
Taxation without Representation? Um, elected representatives. |
Um, the Federal Reserve (whom we are forced by IRS thugs to pay our income tax to) is NOT elected. It's a privately owned banking cartel and it has bankrupted our country, in addition to causing both the Great Depression and the Greatest Depression (which we are undergoing at present). It is probably the most evil institution ever. The banks have stolen trillions (which we pay interest on) and we don't even get to know where the money goes, simply because Bernanke doesn't want to tell us. Inflation is also a tax. |
I welcome this section of your post. Even if we were to regard the Federal Reserve as 'the most evil institution ever,' it was still established by an act of Congress, is subject to the same basic regulations and limits as other independent Federal agencies, and its terms of existence and accountability may be modified at Congress' discretion. The power to tax is certainly the power to destroy, but in this case, it is held within the hands of represented officials and those entrusted with the task by represented officials. The analogy to the circumstances of the original Tea Party, is at best weak. |
I think the point is that instead of having the British Empire dominating us, we now have our own government (at the behest of the banks) operating outside the confines of the constitution. You are correct that legislation was ultimately passed by elected representatives (the legality of the process is debatable), but they are still undermining the constitution whether they were elected or not. At the end of the day the US is a constitutional republic, not a majority-rule democracy. There is no room under the constitution for a central banking system to control and rob the country.
There is also a limit to the possibility of simply getting people to vote out the old and vote in new representatives who will do things like abolish the Fed. Most people don't even know what the Fed is, and have never even read the constitution (they don't even know their own rights). Large populist movements can put a great deal of pressure on the federal government to at least back off from its criminality, and expose the Fed for what it is - that was the original intent of the Tea Party movement started at Ron Paul rallies.
| Quote: |
| The germination of the movement doesn't matter so much as what the Tea Party represents now, so I concede that part of the argument. Meanwhile, you have conceded that Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and much of the mainline GOP have since joined the movement. I don't rely nearly as much on the MSM as many others do, although its hard to say exactly what constitutes mainstream media. |
I agree with you totally about Glenn Beck et al - they're all a bunch of phonies, and their followers useful idiots.
| Quote: |
Lastly, let me address the passionate libertarianism. I get where you're coming from. Your ideas even make some sense. I even sympathize somewhat that in the American two-party system, the ideas can't be viable until compromises are made with the nat'l security cons and the social cons that eventually water down the necessary intensity of the reforms.
But none of that exactly saves the Tea Party movement. The name its adopted reflects its hysterical hyperbole and those within the movement reflect its hypocrisy. If this is Obama's primary opposition, then he will win, again. |
Well, you're not wrong. Maybe the original Tea Party movement can just change its brand name then (call itself the "End the Fed" or "Constitutional" movement or something), and carry on... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Well, you're not wrong. Maybe the original Tea Party movement can just change its brand name then (call itself the "End the Fed" or "Constitutional" movement or something), and carry on... |
The name they picked is ridiculous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lithium
Joined: 18 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| If Obama doesn't get re-elected, the Tea Parties will stop existing. They're nothing more than a collection of useful idiots being used by the American Right to rabble-rouse. Once Republicans are back in power, they'll have served their purpose. The media will stop reporting on them, Fox News will stop promoting them, and since they're no longer getting attention, they'll go back to their lives. |
In a round about yet liberal way, you are correct. Once the Tea Parties get their country back from the socialists in the White House now and this horrible liberal congress, they will have no reason to protest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Tea Party is becoming a real party. They are running candidates under their own name in numerous states in 2010, they have organizing committies to organize as a real political party in every state and they have at least one official elected official already:
| Ballot Access News wrote: |
One of Florida Tea Party Congressional Nominees is an Elected County Commissioner
May 4th, 2010
One of the three U.S. House candidates in Florida for the ballot-qualified Tea Party is a Polk County Commissioner. He is Randy Wilkinson, running in the 12th district. See this story about him. As the story points out, because Wilkinson changed his registration from �Republican� to �Tea Party�, he is probably the first elected official anywhere to be a member of the political party named �Tea Party.� |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
