"Tea Party GOP Drives US Towards Catastrophic Default, World Panic"

I think the whole misunderstanding is that apparently some people believe the Tea Party movement came out of the Republican party as an orchestrated plot of some sort.

I'd be more inclined to characterize tea partiers as people who have broken ranks with the Republican party and made a lot of noise about how our country needs to make some changes in taxing and spending.

Then, some Republicans (Bachmann, to name one) saw the writing on the wall and aligned themselves very quickly with the Tea Party movement.

The Tea Party movement has been inaccurately portrayed by the media from the beginning.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by inforeal
None of the posts above understand that the Tea Party is a corporate shill; it is not even a legitimate movement. You should try reading what Tarpley says about who invented them—right-wing PTB.

Also, they are threatening to bring down the economic system because of their adherence to no taxes for the rich, they don’t really care about the deficit. If they had they would have made a deal with Obama.

The only good that can come from a default is that people finally will see the Tea party and their Republican conservative matrix for what they truly are.

I'm surprised more people don't know this.

The tea party "is"?
( -3 flags and stars for grammar). The "teaparty(movement)IS made of many individuals: whites/blacks/asians/hispanics. Workers ( both blue and white collar),Mom's, home makers.

Funny I didn't see any corporate logos at any rallies I attended, just lots of old ladies with teabags swinging from their Sun bonnets.and real honest to God hand lettered signs. Lots of "mekong "olympics" 66-68" hats (vets) . and a few cops/feds behind sunglasses( Sgt Stedanko just never seems to blend in); a remote camera atop a collapsible boom or two.I find all this:" The teaparty Is:" Just laughable from people who have obviously never been to a rally (just regurgitating the "huff post.")..


So what if a few wealthy ( kochs?) industrialists throw their money behind their politics?

Industry is what made this country great; kept it employed; and the wages from such work funded all those pet social programs over the years. Now y'all want the social programs but are intent on taxing business out of business to get them.(
killing the goose that laid that golden egg).
All that money came from production of real goods and services! Courtesy of American entreprenuers and industrialists.

Ron Paul, BTW folks, is finished. He is as much likely to be president as Mickey Mouse.
He is at best a third party dream, and the third party dream died with Ross Perot in 1992.
Remember him? He was talking the same stuff as Paul, but actually better stuff because he unlike Ron Paul wasn’t a corporatist who would die for the rich and powerful behind a pipe dream called libertarianism.

Perot got 19 percent of the vote in 1992, and talked about outsourcing and jobs going to Mexico as well as the horrible debt. So believe me, this Tea party stuff is not new; only old stuff dressed in new clothes, but this time used by certain sinister right-wing forces that want to do damage to people.

Perot was much better than this Tea party crew becasue he dealt with jobs as well as the debt.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds

How ANYONE can still pretend the vast majority of those under the 'tea party' banner are not just the same old republicans as always is beyond me....

THAT is why we need Recall! It even made it into Rasmussen reports. The Tea Party and others are starting to get involved in state politics and are pushing through much needed legislation like Recall and The fully Informed Jury Movement: www.fija.org...

Expand Voters’ Rights to Recall Politicians

With American politicians still refusing to substantively address the looming consequences of their fiscal irresponsibility, it only makes sense that voters are feeling frustrated and powerless. Last November’s elections sent an unambiguous message to leaders at all levels of government that unsustainable spending will no longer be tolerated – yet it’s becoming increasingly obvious that only a handful of leaders are heeding this message. ....

Currently, recall elections are not permitted in the United States for federal officeholders, and at present only nineteen states allow recall elections for state officeholders. Of these nineteen states, seven (Alaska, Georgia, Kansas, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Montana and Washington) require specific grounds for a recall election to be held, while Illinois provides for the recall of governors only. Also, there are arduous signature-gathering requirements that serve to dissuade voters from initiating recall efforts.

In spite of its relatively sparse implementation as a part of our American democracy, voter recall is firmly grounded in the history of representative government....

..with frustrated voters demanding immediate results and new methods of holding their leaders accountable if they fail to produce those results, voter recall could be on the verge of making a comeback.

Last year saw a noticeable uptick in the number of recall petition drives mounted at the local level...

The idea of being able to hold the politicians feet to the fire is gaining momentum.

Recall Congress Now Org

While 18 of the 50 United States offer their citizens an opportunity to recall their elected officials, it is a fact that in our nation’s history, no federal legislator has yet been recalled.

It has not been for lack of interest. Rather, the process has languished in part due to debates on whether or not legal authority exists for recall of U.S. Senators and Congressmen; and, in the case of Idaho, interference by a state court prevented recall of a federal legislator....

After reviewing the body of law and opinion concerning recall, it is apparent that if recall of federal legislators is to succeed, it will likely only be after an intense battle in the federal court system as to the degree to which the courts will go to allow the literal meaning of the Tenth Amendment to be in force and effect.

As this author reads this language, it appears clear that " the States ‘ and " the people " living with in them, should be recognized to have the right of recall.

But in order to implement a strategy that will enable recall petitions to result in actual removal of errant Senators and Congressmen, considerable legal and political obstacles will present themselves and can only be overcome by understanding the lengths to which those opposed to recall can be expected to go...

Eighteen states have recall provisions. Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin all have recall of some kind available to their voters. Only seven of these states require any grounds.
www.uscitizensassociation.com...

just my two cents .............. why are all the faces / mouthpieces of the so called tea party so utterly lacking in intelligence? Bachmann, DeMent, Allen West, ....... need I say more? I mean come on, if you want your so called grass weed movement to be taken seriously could you at least put a face on it that has some brains to back it up? maybe the Koch boys could buy you a real purty face with a fancy ed-jum-acation for your (cough, cough) campaign.

reply to post by crimvelvet

Original post by MrWendal

What exactly is the "Tea Party GOP"? That sounds like a lot of silly double speak to me. Either they are GOP or they are not.

reply by crimvelvet

From what I can see from the outside, it is a bunch of Americans who woke up. They finally figured out a third party is not going to work so they are staging a Palace coup and trying to gain actual control of one of the two parties and throw the Bankster out on their rears.

All The crap you see in the media is the attempt by the Elite to regain control and marginalize those who are staging the take-over attempt.

THAT is why they call themselves the "Tea Party"

Sorry but I respectfully disagree here. The only political affiliation that has been consistently growing over at the last two decades or so are the independents:

Source (ballot-access.org)

Totals February 2008 were: Dem. 39,139,653 (41.66%), Rep. 29,955,197 (31.89%), Indp. & misc. 23,315,495 (24.82%), Constitution 384,722 (.41%), Green 261,754 (.28%), Libertarian 225,529 (.24%), Reform & Independence 391,915 (.42%), other parties 270,409 (.29%).

Totals October 2004 were: Dem. 37,301,951 (42.19%), Rep. 28,988,593 (32.79%), Indp. & misc. 20,471,250 (23.15%), Constitution 320,019 (.36%), Green 298,701 (.34%), Libertarian 235,521 (.27%), Reform 63,729 (.07%), Natural Law 39,670 (.04%), other parties 695,639 (.79%).

Totals October 2000 were: Dem. 38,529,264 (43.84%), Rep. 28,813,511 (32.78%), Indp. & misc. 18,999,126 (21.62%), Constitution 348,977 (.40%), Libertarian 224,713 (.26%), Green 193,332 (.22%), Reform 99,408 (.11%), Natural Law 61,405 (.07%), other parties 620,668 (.71%).

Totals October 1992 were: Dem. 35,616,630 (47.76%), Rep. 24,590,383 (32.97%), Indp. & misc. 13,617,167 (18.26%), Green 102,557 (.14%), Libertarian 100,394 (.13%), other parties 554,668 (.74%).

To summarize:

Democrats
1992 = 47.76%
2000 = 43.84%
2004 = 42.19%
2008 = 41.66%

Republicans
1992 = 32.97%
2000 = 32.78%
2004 = 32.79%
2008 = 31.89%

Independents
1992 = 18.26%
2000 = 21.62%
2004 = 23.15%
2008 = 24.82%

Looking at this purely from a growth factor (and disregarding the inherent "party loyalty factor" which is surely prevalent in both the Dem and Rep figures), it paints a pretty clear picture.

Also, as of 2004, there were 72 million registered Democrats, 55 million registered Republicans and 42 million registered Independents as shown here. Though I couldn't quickly find updated statics, I have no doubt that these numbers have continued to climb in the Independent category.

This shows an unquestionable lack of faith in our current system of government and I don't agree with the rationale that the Tea Party attached themselves to the GOP because they felt it evident that a three party system doesn't work (this type of rhetoric merely keeps us locked in the same paradigm that's been the root cause of our current problems). This country is ripe for a third party to present a viable candidate and if the Tea Party were truly just genuine purists consisting of average Americans looking for a better answer vis-a-vis "revolutionary thinkers", they could have easily established themselves as a separate party. So this again begs the question as to why they attached themselves to the GOP party? There on many on the boards who are better educated than I in political strategy who can offer some answers to this question. One immediate thought that comes to my mind is whether you really think that people like Michelle Bachmann would have gotten any validation or attention without being considered part of the GOP blend?

Personally, I think that terms such as "two party system", "single payor system", "left/right", etc. are merely affective buzz words used to keep the masses anchored within that particular ideology's paradigm (be it positive or negative). When we start to contemplate and make the mistake of "accepting" the fact that a three party system is destined to fail because it hasn't succeeded before, we've already lost the battle.

Timidgal

Originally posted by LooksLikeWeMadeIt
just my two cents .............. why are all the faces / mouthpieces of the so called tea party so utterly lacking in intelligence? Bachmann, DeMent, Allen West, ....... need I say more? I mean come on, if you want your so called grass weed movement to be taken seriously could you at least put a face on it that has some brains to back it up? maybe the Koch boys could buy you a real purty face with a fancy ed-jum-acation for your (cough, cough) campaign.

edit on 23-7-2011 by LooksLikeWeMadeIt because: added some adjectives

Unless, of course, the game plan is to ensure NOT winning the 2012 election, while playing to their social conservative base. In which case, these ignorant mouth pieces you list are PERFECT for their role.

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
I think the whole misunderstanding is that apparently some people believe the Tea Party movement came out of the Republican party as an orchestrated plot of some sort.

I'd be more inclined to characterize tea partiers as people who have broken ranks with the Republican party and made a lot of noise about how our country needs to make some changes in taxing and spending.

Then, some Republicans (Bachmann, to name one) saw the writing on the wall and aligned themselves very quickly with the Tea Party movement.

The Tea Party movement has been inaccurately portrayed by the media from the beginning.

Except that the 'real' tea party' was infiltrated almost IMMEDIATELY after Obama's election by Freedom Works. The fact that so few who fly the tea party banner are even AWARE of this only highlights how successful the co-optation was.

The VAST majority of those who refer to themselves as "Tea Party' are just Social Conservative Republicans. Period.

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl

Guess what...many of us tea partiers are also critical of George Bush's decisions and policies.

Yes, almost a decade too late.

The difference between tea partiers and "the same old republicans" is that we know the current path our country is on is unsustainable. And this has been the case for more than just the Obama years.

Then where was 'the tea party' in 2001? or 2003? Hmmm?

I didn't mention troops in my earlier response. Again, guess what....I am a HUGE fan of bringing the troops home.

And yet you supported GW Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq. Interesting. Too bad I don't recall anyone of you tea party folks at any of those massive anti war rallies across the country calling for Bush's impeachment in 2003,

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by inforeal
None of the posts above understand that the Tea Party is a corporate shill; it is not even a legitimate movement. You should try reading what Tarpley says about who invented them—right-wing PTB.

Also, they are threatening to bring down the economic system because of their adherence to no taxes for the rich, they don’t really care about the deficit.

I'm surprised more people don't know this.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
I am surprised An ATSer cant smell very obvious BANKSTER bull turds.

The MSM is OWNED by the bankster/corporate cartel as are the foundations and "political think tanks" aka propaganda propagation incubators.

The Media is controlled by and the Tea party is a creation of the "bankster/corproate cartel"

Originally posted by 46ACE
Industry is what made this country great; kept it employed; and the wages from such work funded all those pet social programs over the years. Now y'all want the social programs but are intent on taxing business out of business to get them.(
killing the goose that laid that golden egg).

"taxing business out of business"

"The rich" could be taxed tremendously more before getting anywhere near that point.

Social programs were created in response to the massive centralization of power by corporations in an attempt to prevent people from becoming slaves.

It was not a gift from the plutocracy, it was forced on them just like child labor laws and everything else the working class has ever received.

Originally posted by inforeal
All that money came from production of real goods and services! Courtesy of American entreprenuers and industrialists.

Without the masses to do the real physical labor to create these goods and services (and buy them) they would not exist and the plutocracy would not be able to live in their fantasy world.

"The rich" depend on the masses for their life style.

"The rich " benefit from "the government" more than anyone else; by far.

reply to post by timidgal

Sorry but I respectfully disagree here. The only political affiliation that has been consistently growing over at the last two decades or so are the independents:

Glad to hear it since I am a registered G. D. I.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by inforeal

 

*yawn*
Blaming the Tea Party for the financial mess we're in is about as effective as blaming the fork and spoon for a lousy meal.

It's pathetic, seeing the left run around placing blame for Obama's over-spending and poor mis-management of the economy on everyone BUT the person responsible.

I personally hope we do "default". Giving Obama a higher debt ceiling is like raising the D.U.I. limit to curb drunk driving.

Strange reply, such short memories. Obama INHERITED an economic crisis it occurred during Bush's watch!

How can Obama get to grips with the economy when his hands are tied by your warped political system.

Nobody is blaming the Tea Party for the crisis. They are blaming it for ignoring the solution. But hey as the OP stated and the article quoted : the Tea Party is group of (deluded - my opinion) people finance by some very rich people who wish to roll back ALL state intervention.

But I don't care I don't live in the US. I do feel sorry for the millions of people suffering at the hands of a rich elite who are getting even richer. Given the economic crisis and causes that is a truly sick and immoral situation.

I've been a contributing editor/writer on another website since 2003. I actually get paid there (cough it up, ATS )
As an independent, I had the freedom to be as critical of Bushs' policies, as I can now be of Obamas'.
As a life long conservative (except for that one year in college, but I was experimenting) I have a long solid history of being consistant in my views, regardless of whether they were supported by dems, GOP, or not.

I find it rather telling, that progressives have given themselves the authority to classify, demean, abase, something that they themselves have been brainwashed about.

This thread has become proof.
I would like to thank all the progressivs for doing a better job of typifying themselves then I ever could.

I'm ready for the government to be torn down to just the military, emergency relief although the military could do that if necessary and a few agencies to set standards like radio frequencies, drug / food quality and communicable disease. A low flat tax on all purchases with no deductions. Everything else would have to be voted on by the people. Finally, return all power to the states.

reply to post by beezzer


It's cute how you people all pretend to not have championed and supported Bush policies for the past decade.

Adorable, actually.

Just like the Democrats who pretend their elected officials dont authorize war.

reply to post by malcr

Strange reply, such short memories. Obama INHERITED an economic crisis it occurred during Bush's watch!

OBAMA inherited CLINTON's mess!

Clinton RATIFIED The World Trade Organization, NAFTA... that exported millions of US jobs. We went from 24% of our labor force in manufacturing down to under 9% during my working life time, much during the last decade. Free Trade Agreements not only meant exporting jobs and losing tax revenue from earnings, it was a double WHAMMY because they also CUT import excise duties from about 3% to zilch! This is what allows the Corporate Cartels to make money by manufacturing overseas instead of within the country.

And Do not forget the mortgage crisis and Banker/AIG bailouts.

You can lay that mess at CLINTON's door too:

Clinton and BANKING LAWS

Clinton's signing of laws that repealed the McFadden Act of 1927, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 lead to the Formation of Mega Banks. He is also responsible for the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 that was responsible for marginal mortgage loans doomed to fail and the unregulated CDSs used to insure the banks against foreclosure.

A list of important banking laws can be found here: www.fdic.gov...

The critical part of the Banksters scam was the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. This allowed CDSs (insurance) to be placed on mortgages. If a bank has a couple of CDSs on your mortgage then the bank WANTS to force you into foreclosure because he can double or triple his money AND get the property too. See: How the AIG Bailout Could be Driving More Foreclosures

You can go even further back to Reagan and the hostile takeover era that raped good, financially solid US companies and transfered the assets to the financial community again destroying jobs. LINK

Bush was a real S.O.B. and his contribution was expensive wars but blaming the mess just on Bush is idiotic and means you do not see the long term plans of the Elite in action.

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by beezzer

 

It's cute how you people all pretend to not have championed and supported Bush policies for the past decade.

Adorable, actually.

Just like the Democrats who pretend their elected officials dont authorize war.

It'd be neat to see some sort of proof of your accusation. But why provide proof when making stuff up is so much easier.

one final thought on the tea party b 4 I book for dinner (IMHO, the tea party is like my version of jock itch & man o man with this heat they are exceptionally aggravating as of late) ........ who knows maybe ELENIN will hit and save us all from the wrath of the tea party & their demented game. as far as this tree hugger (me) goes I'll take my chances with ELENIN over the t/p nuts any old day. ...........

reply to post by beezzer


Don't get me wrong, beezle. I can understand the appeal of claiming 'tea party' statues after a decade of championing Bush's neo con policies.

Although you being so pro war, I'm curious how you reconcile that with your 'limited government' claims.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds

Don't get me wrong, beezle. I can understand the appeal of claiming 'tea party' statues after a decade of championing Bush's neo con policies.

Although you being so pro war, I'm curious how you reconcile that with your 'limited government' claims.

HUH

Beezzer supporting WARS???? Ron Paul/Tea Party want to bring ALL troops home so where the heck did you get that Idea?

I think you are confusing the neo-cons in here somewhere.''