quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

That was supposed to be part of the purpose of the convention they held this past weekend. Also at least for me, it was very cool to meet a bunch of folks that had the same mindset on the direction we have been headed for quite some time and what we could do as individuals to make a difference.

So you attended the for profit event? At $550 a ticket? Are you pleased that Tancredo got paid to give an opening speech that included calling for bringing back a prominent symbol of the Jim Crowe era? Do you wonder, after hearing him, why a substantial number of Americans view the tea party movement as essentially a racist movement?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

The whole movement makes me wonder. 6 figures for Palin to speak. Most wanting her to run for President. But, when it comes down to brass facts, will the GOP actually endorse her again? I cant imagine they would. How much credibility would she carry with foreign countries? And im not saying that because she is a woman, but because she is who she is.

I wish they would get behind an actual, viable, candidate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

That was supposed to be part of the purpose of the convention they held this past weekend. Also at least for me, it was very cool to meet a bunch of folks that had the same mindset on the direction we have been headed for quite some time and what we could do as individuals to make a difference.

So you attended the for profit event? At $550 a ticket? Are you pleased that Tancredo got paid to give an opening speech that included calling for bringing back a prominent symbol of the Jim Crowe era? Do you wonder, after hearing him, why a substantial number of Americans view the tea party movement as essentially a racist movement?

If you read what I have wrote I have attended a couple of events. My wording could have been clearer, I did not attend the convention and honestly didn't even watch the coverage of it on CSPAN.

To answer your other questions, I think I made it quite clear how I feel about any sort of qualifiers for voting, but just in case you missed that I feel there are only 2 qualifiers for anyone to be able to vote 1. be a citizen 2. be alive.

Finally, I can't help what gets covered in the mass media or by those wishing to discredit the majority of the tea party goers. I can only speak for my observations at the couple of events I attended and as I stated the kooks were the vast minority, trying to get their 15 minutes of fame.

I hope people on your side of the aisle keep dismissing these masses as herds of sheeple with bigotry as their motive. It will be an interesting wake up call, because this feeling of anger towards the government policies and direction is far more reaching than just these events. Keep telling yourselves that these things are just part of some organized astroturf movement. In doing that you are ignoring the majority of folks attending.

Dems and Repubs alike are going to be held accountable. You saw me complaining about the out of control spending before the current administration was elected, I am still upset by it, and will continue to be until it is under control.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

Gingrich answers a lot of questions with a little bit of revisionist history. I think it's a stretch Bill.

Bill O’Reilly Compares Tea Baggers to Vietnam War Protesters
|
While discussing the Tea Party movement with Newt Gingrich on his FNC The O’Reilly Factor, Bill O’Reilly compared the tea baggers to the people who protested the Vietnam War. Bill-O said, “Not since the Vietnam War have I seen anger at this level from the American public,” because angry white people protesting a black president is exactly the same as protesting a war.

http://www.politicususa.com/Tea-partiers-Vietnam

This is more accurate for me:
The tea partiers aren’t protesting something as life and death as a war. They are upset because the Republican Party lost the 2008 election. The political mood of the country is angry, but that anger is the same as it was in 2006 and 2008. It is fantasy for O’Reilly to pretend that this anger is new and arisen from the Obama presidency.

First off, the tea party movement in general don't that the Repubs lost in 2008, most of them are Indies (including myself as I have made it to a couple of these events now). The folks that I have talked to are pissed at not just the White House (new and old administrations) but congress (Dems and Repubs alike) as well. I think the anger level has grown as can be seen in the Rasmussen poll I cited earlier this week. Not only has it grown, but I would say that it is more focused than it has been since the Nam era protests. It is focused on taking control back by the people, and not letting the asshats in DC run around with no limits. It is about holding the pricks, that have sold our futures down the river, accountable.

Some are protesting the wars, some have been protesting the wars since they started. I will take your opening comment of what is accurate to you to mean that you don't believe that healthcare and financial well being are not as important as war and definitely not matters of life and death? Or are you suggesting that the only protests that are worth paying attention to are those against war?

I also like the racial slant given by your source. Bravo.

Heads back to discuss what to do with all his angry white friends now that we have been found out...

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

Oh, I get it. Now the tea baggers are all a bunch of racists.[8|]

You never cease to amaze me with your threads.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

I read the OP as Brain saying O'Reilly was stretching. (surprise)
 
And then he added his own 'more accurate' opinion with no racial overtone.
 
Let's not put Brain in with RealOne.
 
Avid poster vs psychopath. Not fair.

So you don't find the extra comment about "angry white voters protesting a black president" to say something about the motive or at least the rationale of the opinion piece?

Guess I read to much into it...

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

I read the OP as Brain saying O'Reilly was stretching. (surprise)
 
And then he added his own 'more accurate' opinion with no racial overtone.
 
Let's not put Brain in with RealOne.
 
Avid poster vs psychopath. Not fair.

Your right, I totally read that wrong. Sorry brain.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

I read the OP as Brain saying O'Reilly was stretching. (surprise)
 
And then he added his own 'more accurate' opinion with no racial overtone.
 
Let's not put Brain in with RealOne.
 
Avid poster vs psychopath. Not fair.

So you don't find the extra comment about "angry white voters protesting a black president" to say something about the motive or at least the rationale of the opinion piece?

Guess I read to much into it...

I saw that as something the idiot O'Reilly said. I saw Brain calling it a stretch.
 
If it's part of the opinion piece, then I also think it's an overreach.
 
Just to be clear - it's not my opinion either.
 
I questioned the attribution some people gave to Brain agreeing to the piece, which I don't believe he does, from my read of the post.

Nah the part I quoted was added on by the author of the oped. I would also say that Brain agrees with the author as he quotes them almost word for word in his what's accurate for me bit....
from the cited oped:

quote:


The tea partiers aren’t protesting something as life and death as a war. They are upset because the Republican Party lost the 2008 election. The political mood of the country is angry, but that anger is the same as it was in 2006 and 2008. It is fantasy for O’Reilly to pretend that this anger is new and arisen from the Obama presidency.

Guess he figured nobody would read it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

Gingrich answers a lot of questions with a little bit of revisionist history. I think it's a stretch Bill.

Bill O’Reilly Compares Tea Baggers to Vietnam War Protesters
|
While discussing the Tea Party movement with Newt Gingrich on his FNC The O’Reilly Factor, Bill O’Reilly compared the tea baggers to the people who protested the Vietnam War. Bill-O said, “Not since the Vietnam War have I seen anger at this level from the American public,” because angry white people protesting a black president is exactly the same as protesting a war.

http://www.politicususa.com/Tea-partiers-Vietnam

This is more accurate for me:
The tea partiers aren’t protesting something as life and death as a war. They are upset because the Republican Party lost the 2008 election. The political mood of the country is angry, but that anger is the same as it was in 2006 and 2008. It is fantasy for O’Reilly to pretend that this anger is new and arisen from the Obama presidency.

First off, the tea party movement in general don't that the Repubs lost in 2008, most of them are Indies (including myself as I have made it to a couple of these events now). The folks that I have talked to are pissed at not just the White House (new and old administrations) but congress (Dems and Repubs alike) as well. I think the anger level has grown as can be seen in the Rasmussen poll I cited earlier this week. Not only has it grown, but I would say that it is more focused than it has been since the Nam era protests. It is focused on taking control back by the people, and not letting the asshats in DC run around with no limits. It is about holding the pricks, that have sold our futures down the river, accountable.

Some are protesting the wars, some have been protesting the wars since they started. I will take your opening comment of what is accurate to you to mean that you don't believe that healthcare and financial well being are not as important as war and definitely not matters of life and death? Or are you suggesting that the only protests that are worth paying attention to are those against war?

I also like the racial slant given by your source. Bravo.

Heads back to discuss what to do with all his angry white friends now that we have been found out...

The Tea Baggers are easily the worst informed popular movement ever in the US. They're being used by Dick Armey and his cohorts to give the appearance of some sort of grass roots movement but the fact is there was no hue and cry over the previous administration spending trillions we didn't have. They may claim political independence but the groups who have messed up and presented any sort of platform show clearly that they are from the far right fringe of the GOP.

The ludicrous howls about 'socialism' and the various and sundry blatantly racist portrayals of Obama are proof enough for me that these people didn't know or care about HCR but did care mightily about the skin color of the POTUS. Multiple interviews of and written statements by tea partiers confirms those facts beyond any reasonable doubt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

Cool when do I get my marching orders from the powers that be? I have been to a couple of these now, and yes there are a couple of kooks, but for the most part folks attending these things are everyday people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

There are three things I really like about the movement.

The first is, it's about time America started holding politicians accountable and if it takes being rowdy, unruly, and pissed, then so be it.

The second is the immediate and continued denunciation of them by the left. It's just damned fun to watch.

The third is, they're starting to produce some results.

reminds me in some ways of the thousands of people who stormed the capitol building in Tennessee when they were considering passing a state income tax law, and the shaking, shattered politicians who had to be taken for medical treatment. Nah, not because anyone hurt them, but because they were scared enough to shit their pants.

That's the problem with federal politics. Ain't no one shittin their pants. They're still proclaiming themselves to be "public" servants.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

That was supposed to be part of the purpose of the convention they held this past weekend. Also at least for me, it was very cool to meet a bunch of folks that had the same mindset on the direction we have been headed for quite some time and what we could do as individuals to make a difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

Good to know where you get your talking points from now... My regards to those at the Huffington Post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain


So you hold them accountable by electing Republicans who are more corrupt than Democrats, like Mike Bown in Massachusetts??? Makes perfect sense to me. Not.

How about voting for a real independent intstead of a Republican pretendiing he's a Democrat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

There are three things I really like about the movement.

The first is, it's about time America started holding politicians accountable and if it takes being rowdy, unruly, and pissed, then so be it.

The second is the immediate and continued denunciation of them by the left. It's just damned fun to watch.

The third is, they're starting to produce some results.

reminds me in some ways of the thousands of people who stormed the capitol building in Tennessee when they were considering passing a state income tax law, and the shaking, shattered politicians who had to be taken for medical treatment. Nah, not because anyone hurt them, but because they were scared enough to shit their pants.

That's the problem with federal politics. Ain't no one shittin their pants. They're still proclaiming themselves to be "public" servants.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

I also like the racial slant given by your source. Bravo.

Heads back to discuss what to do with all his angry white friends now that we have been found out...

These are signs photographed at tea parties, for you and thishereboi:


[image]http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/1398/slide_1398_20072_large.jpg[/image]




[image]http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/1398/slide_1398_20115_large.jpg[/image]  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

So defense spending is the only place that the budget needs to be trimeed to get this monster of a budget under control? Right now defense spending (even with the 2 wars) is at historical lows compared to the GDP (compare 9.0% in '62 to 3.0% in 2002 and 4.7% in 2009). Don't get me wrong there is definitely room for cuts in defense, but the biggest budget busters (besides the crazy one off programs from the last 2 administrations) are ones that no politician wants to tackle. Social security and medicare will continue to grow in size and scope with no sign of that growth ever ending.

We need to start phasing younger folks out of these pyramid schemes, to get some sort of restraints on the cost. In a year or so when the baby boomers start hitting the books, we will be looking at more people collecting than those paying in. With the increases in life expectancy since the start of the programs, we are paying out for much longer than was expected. These madatory spending programs account for $2.5 TRILLION of the budget and that is going to continue to grow exponentially. Something can and needs to be done in this area, or the other proposed budget cuts and tax increases won't matter.

If taxes need to be increased to help pay down the debt, well I would be all for it. However, the insane spending on top of the unfunded mandates need to be put in check first. You don't go out and buy a new house, car, television and furniture, then try to figure out where you are going to make more money to pay for them. That seems a bit backwards to me.