It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by inforeal
The Tea Party is anti-democratic and guilty of abuse of power
Amazing people here don’t see that the blackmail that the Tea party is doing to the US government is dictatorial, anti-democratic, anathema to the US constitution, dangerous, and is setting a precedent for worst things to come.
Here is the scenario:
These 85 or so congress people voted in office in 2010 by Tea party support are not remotely the majority of the American people, yet they are using their newly acquired power to threaten the American system of government with default if they don’t get there way. In this scenario it is the debt ceiling that they are using to do their blackmail. Previously, raising the debt ceiling was, is, and has been a bi-partisan simple process, that even the conservative Republican Ronald Regan has denounced people for playing politics with. They, the Tea party are using this vulnerable part of the Governmental system to blackmail it . . . it’s that simple. This is an abuse of power, undemocratic, and fascistic. And those who do not see it this way. . . don’t because they are partial to the cause of the Tea party Republicans. When this very undemocratic method one day is turned against them—then they will see the danger that this is to a democracy. Turn the tables: what if 85 extreme left-wing congress people did the same thing to the country? How would you then feel about that?
As of now because of these people the US economy will likely default and enormous economic disasterous repercussions will be resultant.
So bottom line, 85 freshman congress people who don’t represent even 1 percent of the American people have taken over the Republican Party and have blackmailed the system to do their bidding and if not have threatened to destabilize the American economic system.
That is anti-democratic, and an abuse of power, and opposite everything the spirit and letter of the US constitution stands for.
Please check your information. The US is not a democracy and never has been. I disagree with most of your posts, but you are smarter than this. The US is a Constitutional Republic, at least for now anyway.
Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by KrazyJethro
America is a democracy and Republic!
The Tea party I said is anti-democratic. They have not remotely the majority of the American people supporting their issues and certainly not their methods.
Definition of democracy: a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Originally posted by inforeal
America is a democracy and Republic!
The Tea party I said is anti-democratic. They have not remotely the majority of the American people supporting their issues and certainly not their methods.
Definition of democracy: a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by SpaDe_
They were voted in by a majority of the voting populace and they never abused the system like the Republicans are doing now. That’s the point of my OP.
They NEVER threatened to destabilize the economic system if they didn’t get their way.
Originally posted by sons of liberty 1776
reply to post by citizen6511
The tea party as the brown shirts? Are you serious? Please do some real research on the Wiemar Republic and the brownshirts before making such a crazy claim.
I don't think most Americans will wipe the drool from their chin or turn off the idiot box long enough to notice or care.
Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by dakota1s2
Do you think most of America would support the threat of the default of the american economic system to get thier political issues enacted ?
Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by dakota1s2
Do you think most of America would support the threat of the default of the american economic system to get thier political issues enacted ?
Originally posted by inforeal
Do you think most of America would support the threat of the default of the american economic system to get thier political issues enacted ?
Wow, you seriously need a clue.
Originally posted by citizen6511
Originally posted by sons of liberty 1776
reply to post by citizen6511
The tea party as the brown shirts? Are you serious? Please do some real research on the Wiemar Republic and the brownshirts before making such a crazy claim.
the similarities are endless, the only difference is the Americanization of the movement.
they operate as bullies, are financed by corporate interests using them to maintain their tax and other privileges.
are pretending to be saving the nation, while they are by far the biggest threat the USA has faced in years.
cut benefits to the vulnerable and old, and worship those who have wealth and power.
survival of the fittest, to hell with everybody else.
the worship of all that is military.
the hatred of jews has been replaced by hating a black president.
the ingredients might be different, but the political soup is the same.
The Sturmabteilung (SA) (German pronunciation: [ˈʃtʊʁmʔapˌtaɪlʊŋ] ( listen); English: Storm Detachment; or English: Stormtroopers) functioned as a paramilitary organization of the German Nazi Party. It played a key role in Adolf Hitler's rise to power in the 1920s and 1930s. SA men were often called "brownshirts" for the colour of their uniforms (similar to Benito Mussolini's blackshirts).
The SA was the first Nazi paramilitary group to develop pseudo-military titles for bestowal upon its members. The SA ranks were adopted by several other Nazi Party groups, chief amongst them the SS, itself originally a branch of the SA. Brown-coloured shirts were chosen as the SA uniform because a large batch of them were cheaply available after World War I, having originally been ordered during the war for colonial troops posted to Germany's former African colonies.[1]
The SA became largely irrelevant after Adolf Hitler ordered the "Blood Purge" of 1934. This event became known as the Night of the Long Knives. The SA was effectively superseded by the SS, though never formally dissolved.
A permanent group of party members who would serve as the Saalschutz Abteilung (hall defense detachment) for the DAP gathered around Emil Maurice after the February 1920 incident at the Hofbräuhaus. There was little organization or structure to this group, however. The group was also called the Ordnertruppen around this time.[5] More than a year later, on 3 August 1921, Hitler redefined the group as the "Gymnastic and Sports Division" of the party (Turn- und Sportabteilung), perhaps to avoid trouble with the government.[6] It was by now well recognized as an appropriate, even necessary, function or organ of the party. The future SA developed by organizing and formalizing the groups of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers who were to protect gatherings of the Nazi Party from disruptions from Social Democrats and Communists. By September 1921 the name Sturmabteilung was being used informally for the group.[7] Hitler, it should be noted, was the official head of the Nazi Party by this time.[8]
From April 1924 until late February 1925 the SA was known as the Frontbann to try to circumvent Bavaria's ban on the Nazi Party and its organs (instituted after the abortive Beer Hall putsch of November 1923). The SA carried out numerous acts of violence against socialist groups throughout the 1920s, typically in minor street-fights called Zusammenstöße ('collisions'). As the Nazis evolved from an extremist political party to the unquestioned leaders of the government, the SA was no longer needed for its original purpose: the acquisition of political power. An organization that could inflict more subtle terror and obedience was needed, and the SA (which had been born out of street violence and beer hall brawls) was simply not capable of doing so. The SA also posed a threat to the Nazi leadership and to Hitler's goal of co-opting the Reichswehr to his ends, as Röhm's ideal was to incorporate the "antiquated" German army into a new "people's army": the SA. The younger SS was more suited to this task and began to take over the previously held roles of the SA.
Originally posted by citizen6511
Originally posted by sons of liberty 1776
reply to post by citizen6511
The tea party as the brown shirts? Are you serious? Please do some real research on the Wiemar Republic and the brownshirts before making such a crazy claim.
the similarities are endless, the only difference is the Americanization of the movement.
they operate as bullies, are financed by corporate interests using them to maintain their tax and other privileges.
are pretending to be saving the nation, while they are by far the biggest threat the USA has faced in years.
cut benefits to the vulnerable and old, and worship those who have wealth and power.
survival of the fittest, to hell with everybody else.
the worship of all that is military.
the hatred of jews has been replaced by hating a black president.
the ingredients might be different, but the political soup is the same.
You are totally wrong. In a DEMOCRACY, the civil rights movement(ie rights for minorities) would never have passed.
Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by KrazyJethro
Your problem is that you are being too literal. Democracy and republic are similar and republics utilize the democratic system of voting and majority rule to operate. In reality nothing is all one thing and all not the other thing. That's why America is a democracy and republic not all of one over the other.
Sure we don’t have a real democracy because most people don’t vote BUT, the system then has to operate on some form of rule from the standpoint of the elected officials without extreme measures and threats to the system [ as the tea party is doing] based on trust.
Your mentioning civil rights are a case in point. Sure the populace might not have supported it at the time, nevertheless the civil rights laws were passed based on the lawful democratic system of voting in the congress. They were not put in law by threat or blackmail.
edit on 30-7-2011 by inforeal because: (no reason given)