Why I dont buy the "tea party" protests

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
From my view and the majority of americans all the tea party protests did was to put up a hissy fit about spending and socialimisms and then it died down so fast many were beginning to ask whether it had actually started already.

Did you actually watch any coverage of the tea parties that came from anywhere other than CNN or MSNBC? The live feed that CNN had going with no political commentary from their "news anchors" made it abundantly clear that they weren't just talking about socialism and it most certainly didn't die down quickly.

I love the new excuses being thrown around now for the faliure of this corporate fox sponsered "grassroots" movement.... "it was raining" "this is just the first stage" "there will be more people coming in tonight" "we were going to throw tea bags into the sea but we didnt have permission"

What excuses? Thousands of people showed up to protest. That's quite a turn out considering the main stream media practically refused to even mention it until it was already happening.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

I said in this thread.... you have to go back to last year over what one member said

jeeze Jenna is this it? You folks go on about us always playing the race card, yet you cant account for it, all you can do is go to one odd thread last year. I never denied anybody among the Obama supporters who played the race card, however its true that conservatives and fringers here do the same. Nobody is innocent.

Oh, ok. So since it hasn't happened in YOUR thread then it isn't real and never happened. Gotcha. I completely understand now.

The key word in that sentence was "since", as in almost every thread since right before the election. Rest assured it was a heck of a lot more than one post in one thread. But please continue to believe that only things that happen in your thread count.

When Obama gets his term. Im saying round 2 years maybe... but Im sorry.... 4 months and your fellas are jumping the gun about the constitution? Yet I heard nothing from you folks during the Bush administration. tis tis.

Ahh. So Obama gets a free ride on anything that goes wrong during the first two years of his term. So that means that Bush got a free ride for the first two years of his first term, which means that we can't blame the wars on him those would be Clinton's fault. Might want to rethink that one a bit.

And you weren't here during Bush's administration, so no I would imagine you didn't see anything I posted about him.

Clearly yours is the minute a liberal gets into power.

So then you can blame the mess that accumulated over the last 8years onto an administration barely 4 months into office? The worst one in decades? Really now Jenna.

I'd love to see you show me where I even implied that things from Bush's terms could be blamed on Obama. I really would. Have fun with that.

Post a thread of your own and we can have our debate there on that matter. For now your restricted to your view of things, not everybody elses, not the general consensus of economists.

Did I mention economists? Oh wait, that was you. I have been posting my own views, you just don't like them. And are you really trying to tell me what I can and cannot say in this thread? Really? You think I'm out of line, you are more than welcome to click that little ALERT button and let the mods decide if I am. I can assure you that I have stayed on topic, and well within the T&C's of this site.



EDIT: Main street media? Where on earth did that come from? Fixed it.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Jenna]

reply to post by Jenna


I only came to this thread to see "Why I don't buy the 'tea party' protests."

Now I know.

Joe Walsh once said, "You can't argue with a sick mind." He meant that it is a waste of time to try to convince someone of something they do not want or are afraid to consider.

I don't have time to waste. "I'll see you on the Dark Side of the Moon."

Deny ignorance.

jw

Originally posted by Jenna
That is exactly what has happened. Disagree with a single point

You have not made any point jenna. You have not directly replied to the OP, you are yet to deny the neocons and their major handling and hijacking of what was a Pauler movement, you are yet to justify why unconstitutional Bush politicians have the legitimacy to speak at what is suppose to be "tea party" rallies.

Agreed. Many people either didn't care or didn't realize what was going on with the country until fairly recently.

you serious? after 8years of the previous administration, their blatant lies over the war, their unconstitutional laws such as the patriot act and torture and your telling me that a bunch of disgruntled conservatives "didnt" realize anything until a liberal government in. And fox, bushes mouthpiece, was right there to record it all.

Keep on giving eachother pats on the back for it will always be restricted to the realms of the fringe elements on the net, I am thankful everyday we dont have your "leaders" in office any longer.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


On the contrary. I responded to the OP here, and here. The first post you didn't like because I pointed out your hypocrisy. The second you completely ignored. Any points I have made in my other posts you have either ignored, attempted to ridicule with death by laughing smiley face, said I was wrong because it didn't happen in your thread, or basically told me not to post it here.

What you seem to be either missing or outright ignoring is that the tea parties didn't have anything to do with Bush. They were about taxes, spending, and the size of our government. How you get Bush out of that when he is no longer in office is beyond me. If you were just going to keep bashing a guy who is no longer in office, you should have titled this thread "Let's bash Bush" instead of pretending you wanted to discuss the tea parties.

reply to post by Jenna


My OP jenna, was directed at the major involvement of fox and the corporations of these tea parties and the very Bush politicians that acted unconstitutionally and supported wasting tax payer money on wars. I was refering to their legitimacy there. You didnt address that Jenna, instead you decided to go off about Obama. My concern in the OP wasnt about Obama, my concern was directed at the sheer hypocrisy of these protests and the infiltration of a neoconservative movement over what was originally a Paul movement. You never addressed that fact, and you continue to dodge it.

These protests were merely an attempt to re-establish a new neocon movement, no different... and you continue to deny. Simple fact, if you have nothing to do with neocons or bushies, dont defend them and actually have nothing to do with them, otherwise your no different.

Now whats more surprising, a mere 340,000 folks protested around the nation.... Limbaugh has what some 20 million listeners... Hannity has some 2 million. Paul had some 4 million voters last year. What happened?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


I take it you still didn't read the second link. I even went back and found the post for you so you wouldn't have to search for it. I responded to what was in the OP, what more do you want? Meanwhile, each and every time I make a point you ignore it and either go off on a tangent about something else or say that wasn't what you were talking about.

Edit: My very first post addressed your own hypocrisy. The second post I linked for you addressed your points from the OP.

[edit on 17-4-2009 by Jenna]

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Now whats more surprising, a mere 340,000 folks protested around the nation.... Limbaugh has what some 20 million listeners... Hannity has some 2 million. Paul had some 4 million voters last year. What happened?

Same could have been said for those national wide anti-war protests, Southern Guardian. Personally, I just think you are a little miffed that the number turnouts for these "tea parties" was more than for those national wide anti-war protests. Man, that has got to suck.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

You really think everybody at those protests have the histories to back themselves up regardining the constitution ...
This goes beyond party line, this goes into ideological lines as well.
...
From my view and the majority of americans all the tea party protests did was to put up a hissy fit about spending and socialimisms ...
In about weeks time there will be something else you fellas will be bluffin bout.

First, your timeline is all wrong. The movment began well before Fox, CNN or any other MSM even noticed. Attempting to attribute this to "Fox sponsored" is a false ad hominem.

Criticize the methodology and ideology if you can/will, but don't make up straw men.

As far as ideology is concerned, the event I attended included members of all parties, and no party. No office holders were allowed to speak (to avoid patrtisan appearances), but Democrat and Republican representatives were present and wanted to participate.

Ideologically, the themes were:

Opposition to fascist governmental control of corporations (see, e.g.: TARP, G.M.);
Oppostion to socialistic policies usurping rights reserved to the states (see, e.g. education, health care, marriage, abortion); and,
Profligate borrowing and spending (see, e.g. 2010 Budget, "Stimulus package").

By far, the borrowing/spending and States Rights participants and speakers outnumbered all others, but there was a general consensus that THIS administration's policies were invading too far into people's lives and mortgaging their future without adequate justification and accountability.

Now, what don't you "buy" about people's right to protest these issues?

You agree that fascist control by government of corporations is advisable?
You agree that socialistic policies in which the Federal government determines what is best for its citizens is preferable to Constitutional limits on Federal authority?
You agree that indebting this country and spending without oversight and accountability will "cure" economic problems?

(Look, I KNOW all administrations have attempted some of each of the foregoing.)

You agree that the degree to which the Obama adminstration has attempted to, and intends to, magnify all previous efforts combined is appropriate and Constitutional?

I think I see your ideology, but I fail to see yet why you "don't buy the 'tea party' protests".

Is it that you disagree with their positions, therefore you disagree with the right to organize and voice those objections?

(And don't call me a "Bushie" or NeoCon, because I've never voted a straight ticket in my life, and you don't know what 'neo-con' means)

Simple, really.

Deny ignorance.

jw

Of course wasting tea on a protest is bad, wasting lives on a false war?
Well thats all good and oky doky! Then lets protest! Wheeee!
YOU all are about 8 years too late! (like it'd do any good)
Pretty soon it will be illegal too, anyway!
You should of done that when you realized we invaded the wrong country!
Or when we approved torture or when we gave our future to the banks or....when we reward greed with free handouts! Incredible!
War is slightly more important than being in a higher tax bracket when you're already filthy rich if you ask me! We are completely and utterly gullible! And they get richer.......
When you are ready to cut the apron strings then something will be done,
until then bend back over and pay up like the rest of us....
YOU are the ones who were duped thinking they care bout us!

The sooner this sucker crashes, the sooner we can have something tangible.......
I know ooooooooo scary! Dont even go there!
You know a society NOT based on greed and stuff.....


[edit on 17-4-2009 by dodadoom]

To be honest, i didn't even know about these protests...there is almost nothing on the Australian media about it, seems as though they don't want the same thing over here.

You know, I am the type of guy that will stay silent, bite my tongue most of the time... I can't do this anymore.

The tea parties, no matter what SG says, were not partisan.

They were not a wast of time.

The turnout was huge.

I have always thought that everybody should have their say, and nobody's voice should be denied their chance to speak.

SG, I've gone back and read all your posts in this thread. I've done some research on your other posts.

I have come to the conclusion that you are either an employee of the DNC, or you're completely brainwashed into towing the party line at all costs.

I feel sorry for you, as well as any member that buys into your obvious propaganda.

You just earned my first "IGNORE", which I never thought I would use on here.
I would "FOE" you, but I have NO respect for you, so this is my only option.

I can only hope that most other sensible folks do the same...

Originally posted by cbianchi513


You just earned my first "IGNORE", which I never thought I would use on here.
I would "FOE" you, but I have NO respect for you, so this is my only option.

I can only hope that most other sensible folks do the same...

Perfect, absolutely perfect. This is exactly WHY no one in the U.S. is able to countenance a different P.O.V. "Both sides are guilty of this.. heck... even I am sometimes. "This person says things I find disagreeable so they are not worth listening to. Their opinion is not worthy of my time and may even be evil. God I love my echo chamber, here I am never wrong!"
God forbid we ever attempt to actually hear what someones else says. Heaven help us if we realize that both "sides" want the best for the U.S. but that they come at it from different viewpoints.

Let's just get in a big circle and fire at each other and get it over with ok? Oh crap I better go buy a gun now!

blerg, I need more coffee

Obs out

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
No thats not true obviously. Infact Iv hardly heard any accusations of racism here. Ill tell you one thing though, accusing the president of being a muslim because "he looks like one and has the name of one" certainly calls out intolerance and likewise by all means those individuals should be called out. Somebodies middle name or the way they look should not be a reason for them not to be president or not to be an american.

Well, not in this thread, but take a look at others. Say something bad against Obama, you're a racist.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Well yes, 95% of the folks there had some wacko conspiracy regarding the president.

Really? Got a source or poll for that figure?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Because righty is no longer in power and fox gave them a bone to pick.

I think they're mad because it's Amateur Hour at the White House right now and they aren't impressed with Obama's idea that throwing money at problems automatically fixes them.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
The mistake was done by the very same individuals protesting. Their mistake was voting in an idiot 8years ago, twice. Liberals are once again having to clean it up.

Yeah, by voting in Jimmy Carter.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
When Obama gets his term. Im saying round 2 years maybe... but Im sorry.... 4 months and your fellas are jumping the gun about the constitution? Yet I heard nothing from you folks during the Bush administration.

How long does Obama get? "Hey, he's only been in office 4 months, 6 months, a year, two years, four years". He'll get a free ride his entire term, because it's all Bush's fault about the problems that are going on. Nothing is the fault of the Obamatron.

Obama said the bailout will take effect in two years, because that's when the midterm elections are coming up and the Dems want to keep in office. Other programs will take effect in four years, right about the time he's up for reelection. Wow, what a coincidence!!!

reply to post by observer


Did you even READ my post? Didn't think so...

I just have a serious problem with SG because he is EXACTLY the person that your post portrays.

Thank you for your concise summation of SG!

Originally posted by Seekerof
Same could have been said for those national wide anti-war protests,

oh really? Well it depends on what year your talkin bout... in 07 the protest in the capital got to nearly 100,000.... Since 2003 there were 3 nation wide protests every year in the US.... interms of numbers I was excluding the world protests... in Italy some 500,000 protested back in 05'. Not to mention the Obama primaries and his support, though I guess you know that.

These "tea parties" were to be the climax of what was months in anticipation and "see what will happen" talk, didnt amount to much. Trust me I went as low as I could, but it came to half that much still. But yes good luck to your next movement.

Personally, I just think you are a little miffed that the number turnouts for these "tea parties" was more than for those national wide anti-war protests. Man, that has got to suck.

yes I am so miffed, you can keep your 340,000 nation wide tea parties, dont know if anybody wants to claim it anyway.

Originally posted by cbianchi513
You know, I am the type of guy that will stay silent, bite my tongue most of the time... I can't do this anymore.

Glad I am disturbing the peace among the fringers... bout time they actually got a real debate instead of your average pat on the back one sided discussion.

The tea parties, no matter what SG says, were not partisan.

Yes... just ignore fox news, good ol' newt and all the Bush buddies, ignore the signs with "conservative" on it, ignore the folks outright comparing all libs to communists.... this isnt partisan go back to fox. All the neocon buddies, the typical bushies, hannity who had no issue shutting out Paul and calling all liberal anti-american. Really... howmany times must you lie to yourself?

They were not a wast of time.

They certainly were not a waste of time to the president, to myself and the rest of the liberal population. But yes good on yall to speak your "minds" courtesy of fox

The turnout was huge.

340,000 nation wide was huge.... wonderful. What some 10,000 folks popped up in Houston? Wasnt it 18,000 folks at an Obama rally in Houston just over a year ago? Aint we talkin bout a blood red state? Great I tell ya, really was happenin down there.

I have always thought that everybody should have their say, and nobody's voice should be denied their chance to speak.

I totally agree with you there if theres one thing, fringers, how ever twisted and hypocritical their "protests" were, atleast they got the freedom to speak. It further lost them credibility to the rest of the nation and the world, but atleast they got to have their say.

SG, I've gone back and read all your posts in this thread. I've done some research on your other posts.

All that effort on me? Im flattered.. I really am flattered... didnt know I was such a threat to the fringe majority on this forum..

I have come to the conclusion that you are either an employee of the DNC,

:lolk you keep that in mind buddy. If these is all you have to say regarding my OP well then theres nothing really to debate with ya further on. I tell ya its really something your ignoring me after your first reply to me, it just goes to show how afraid you are of reading opposing views, especially those with facts beyond excuse. So yea you have a good one in that little box of yours.

reply to post by dodadoom

you see that picture with the man and woman wearing those hats with tea bag;s hangin down with their "tea bagging" signs you know the funniest thing of this all is the sheer ignorance regardin the slang term for tea bagging... I tell ya I cant stiop laughin at some of thse pictures of these fringers... it is refreshing to know that all these years they have sunk so low there is little to no chance of them electin another idiot into office.. well atleast for the next 10 years or so...

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
in 07 the protest in the capital .... Since 2003 .... back in 05'...

Now didn't you just tell me a few hours ago that it didn't count if I had to go back to starting eight months ago?

bout time they actually got a real debate instead of your average pat on the back one sided discussion.

It's more frustration that we aren't having a real debate than anything. I'm not the only one who's points you ignore since they don't fit into your narrow view.

All the neocon buddies, the typical bushies, hannity who had no issue shutting out Paul and calling all liberal anti-american. Really... howmany times must you lie to yourself?

So which part is it that you really have a problem with? That all of those people turned out to protest things they find unfair? Or that Ron Paul didn't get elected?

340,000 nation wide was huge....

It was considering the complete lack of coverage by the media.

I totally agree with you there

if theres one thing, fringers, how ever twisted and hypocritical their "protests" were

You can't be serious... Your posts have been filled to the brim with hypocrisy. I enjoy a bit of irony every once in awhile, but it's getting to be too much.

didnt know I was such a threat to the fringe majority on this forum..

If these is all you have to say regarding my OP well then theres nothing really to debate with ya further on.

What debate? Pointing fingers, name calling, and ignoring other people's points in favor of putting in 15 's and basically saying "Yeah whatever. You don't agree with me so you're wrong." is not in any way similar to a debate.

Too right, i think it is all bull. If you have glen beck on promoting it, something must be wrong, lol.

Its the idea of if you see someone doing something, other people just sit back, and accept that they think someone is doing something.

There are bound to be plenty of those people working for the government or companies, to get whatever across.