RE: Tea Party Misconceptions...

RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Sanity -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 7:59:01 PM)
Kitten and the rest of the conspiracy freaks here will be really strange bedfellows. [:D]

cuckoldmepls -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:07:18 PM)
Another huge misconception is that they are anti government. That couldn't be further from the truth. What they are is anti unconstitutional federal government. We wouldn't be in debt at all if they had abided by the 10th amendment. I say they, since I don't count myself as one, but I recognize them as loyal patriots. I don't agree with their free market ideas since it's obvious to me that free trade is not going to work. NAFTA is living proof of that. China is even planning on building car factories in mexico, and ports to offload their cheap crap with cheap labor and transport it with cheap truck drivers.

Musicmystery -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:09:30 PM)
quote: NAFTA is living proof of that. No it's not. Mexico and Canada are our two largest markets--by a very large margin.

TreasureKY -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:19:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: I'm afraid it sounds as if you don't have a very good grasp on the Boston Tea Party. If you're going to patronize posters--sounds like you don't either. The protest was in response to the Tea Act, of which the tax was a minor part of the real reason, a British monopoly on the tea trade. In short, corporate interests were at play. It wasn't patronization, Muse... just a simple observation. I don't claim to be an historical expert, but I am capable of reading and comprehending. I'm aware of the affects of the Tea Act, but I'm also aware of the Stamp Act, the Townsend Acts, and the Boston Massacre leading up to that time. The Tea Act of 1773 simply gave a tax break to the East India Tea Company. Yes, there was corporate interest involved (for Britain), but the King's decision to allow the East India Tea Company a monopoly wasn't solely for the purpose of preventing disruption to the British financial markets... he and the Ministry thought it would quiet the grumblings of the colonists who brought into question Parliament's authority to make laws binding them. Lord North had previously declined to remove the tea tax on principle. The Declaratory Act had already defined the right of the British government to legislate for the colonies. North felt the tax was necessary to maintain the right to legislate, but he and the King believed that offering British taxed tea that was cheaper than what the colonists could obtain from smuggled supplies would placate them. lol... Sort of a 16th Century version of the Walmart mentality. Offer it cheap and they will come happily. [;)] On October 15th, 1773, in a meeting held in New York, the following resolution was adopted: "That the resolution lately entered into by the East India Company, to send out their tea to America subject to the payment of duties on its being landed here, is an open attempt to enforce the ministerial plan, and a violent attack upon the liberties of America." quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Of course, "taxation without representation" sounds cooler, but there had been taxes for several decades. That wasn't the issue that sparked the rebellion. Sorry, but that's just not the case. The subject of the right to tax the Americans, they not being represented in Parliament, had been debated in the House of Commons in March (1763) for the first time, when it was determined in the affirmative by a unanimous vote. When the news of that debate and vote reached Massachusetts, the Assembly of that colony, then in session, immediately resolved: "That the sole right of giving and granting the money of the people of this province is vested in them, as the legal representatives; and that the imposition of taxes and duties by the Parliament of Great Britain upon a people who are not represented in the House of Commons, is absolutely irreconcilable with their rights. That no man can justly take the property of another without his consent; upon which principle the right of representation in the same body which exercises the power of making laws for levying taxes, one of the main pillars of the British Constitution, is evidently founded." These ideas were speedily formulated into the maxim--Taxation without representation is tyranny; and upon that principle the Americans there after rested in opposing the taxation schemes of the mother country. Then again... who knew our ancestors were so cool. [:D]

Musicmystery -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:25:10 PM)
"Although usually considered by itself, the Boston Tea Party was a natural growth of other protests against the British administration in Boston, centered on royal governor Thomas Hutchinson and his subordinates. Until the publication of Thomas Paine's Common Sense in 1776, these protests were notable in their careful avoidance of blaming George III, instead focusing on his council or colonial administrators. The costumes and violence of the Tea Party were also an outgrowth of regular crowd demonstrations in Boston, including burning Catholic figures in effigy, vandalizing administrator's homes or intimidating customs and tax inspectors. Even when not politically motivated, the apprentices and laborers of Boston also engaged in highly charged territorial contests that often ended in injuries and rowdy outbursts, and were led by men who took pains to hide their appearance using symbolic disguises. In all these respects, it was not the Tea Party itself that was unusual, but the British reaction to it." --U.S. History Encyclopedia. The problem was commercial: "The British East India Company, facing severe financial reverses, convinced Parliament to allow them to sell tea in the American colonies at a price that would undercut even smuggled Dutch tea, and raise revenue while clearing their warehouses of a huge surplus. Unfortunately, this tea would still carry the despised three-pence per pound tax, which had remained as a token duty, and would be sold through only a handful of dealers in America. This high-handed policy united small merchants, left out of the deal, with patriot organizations that protested the tax. The arrival of the tea ships Eleanor, Dartmouth and Beaver sparked public protest in Boston, including public meetings, fliers and harassment of the consignees, who took shelter in Castle William to avoid the crowds." --U.S. History Encyclopedia. "The government in London had given a British company the right to sell tea directly to the colonies, thereby undercutting American merchants." --History Encyclopedia.

TreasureKY -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:31:39 PM)
So you just conveniently ignore what I wrote? I think I was pretty clear that yes, there was some corporate interest in there. But there was also a lot of history leading up to the Boston Tea Party. Do you really think two select paragraphs from an encyclopedia can sufficiently sum up the entirety of the situation?

Musicmystery -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:34:34 PM)
Sigh. I gave you two passages that summarize the importance of the commercial impact. That was the point, remember? Ignore? OK, as for the rest--good girl. Oh, you bypassed earlier taxes, and just conveniently ignored the point I just refuted with your side step, but yes, very nicely typed. Yes, THAT was patronizing.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:37:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Sigh. I gave you two passages that summarize the importance of the commercial impact. That was the point, remember? Oh, you bypassed earlier taxes, and just conveniently ignored the point I just refuted with your side step, but yes, very nicely typed. She isn't disagreeing with you. She is just pointing out that there were other aspects as well. You are both basically in agreement, seems to me, but just wanting to emphasize the opposite aspect. Firm Edited to take into account your editing. [8D] Although, since you acknowledged what it was, and are still within the editing window, I kinda thought you might ... you know ... redact that part?

Musicmystery -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:38:30 PM)
OK, noted. I appreciate the clarification. I did misinterpret then. Thanks.

AnimusRex -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:47:52 PM)
No, I don't accept the legitimacy of the Tea Party; In response to the original post, the civil rights movement wanted the enfranchisement of black people, even if they were not clear on the exact mechanisms; the environmental movement wants us to reduce the negative impact on the environment, even if they quibble about the means; The Tea Party really doesn't know what sort of vision of America it wants, aside from such wildly contradictory notions as massive Defense spending and tiny tax rates. This is not a vision for a movement, it is a fantasy of how governing a nation actually works. They are angry about corporate lobbying and government bailouts, yet the promoter and founder of the Tea party, Dick Armey, actually IS a lobbyist for the very banks who got the bailout. They are angry about out of control spending, but as pointed out so many times, have not put forward any vision of what should be cut or by how much. And of course, many are themselves receiving Social Security and Medicare, the two biggest things the government spends money on. What would they do if they actually gained power? So far, the answer according to Rand Paul is, "We have no fuckin' clue." There just isn't any way to take them seriously; they resemble nothing so much as sulking adolescents.

TPEOwner -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:47:55 PM)
Trying to apply logic to liberals is about as likely to succeed as teaching calculus to cows, though the cows may smell better. They don't need to understand. They hate anyone and anything that espouses individual responsibility. All a rational human beings need do is shut up and let the liberals talk The fools will always open their mouths and remove all doubt. Just compare their vitriolic hatred of us, with our amusment at their sheer idiocy. Nuff said. quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY What so many people seem to miss is that the Tea Party is... wait for it... a MOVEMENT. It is a set of ideologies. A trend in thoughts and feelings. It is not a unified organization with recognized leaders... though there are individuals and organizations with recognized leaders who claim to be a part of the movement. A decent analogy would be the environmental movement. The environmental movement is a set of beliefs, but there is no single organization and established leaders. There is no "official" environmental movement... a concrete organization that one can contact to join or register with. There are, however, clubs, websites, organizations, individuals, and companies who claim to be a part of the environmental movement... who label themselves "green". They don't all agree, they don't all share the same vision, and their methods aren't all approved of by each other. So who officially represents the environmental movement? Do the leaders of Greenpeace accept responsibility for the activities of EarthFirst? Does the US Environmental Protection Agency take orders from the head of the Earth Liberation Front? Do you see the issue now with why some individuals here get so frustrated when talk turns to the Tea Party movement? It's infuriating when the media labels as its leader some idiot who gloms onto the Tea Party movement . There is no leader. You can't have a leader of a philosophy. When are individuals going to stop trying to perpetuate the false notion that the Tea Party is an actual organization with recognized leaders? It may be someday, but it isn't right now.

TPEOwner -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:54:35 PM)
Popeye, from one sailor to another...well said. Until we throw both parties out on their collective asses, nothing is going to change. Why should it? between them, they control 100% of the power. Sometimes the balance tips one way, sometimes the other, but it always runs downhill onto us. quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Treasure, that's pretty much what I get out of it. But, I'm not a political scholer. When they first came out I thought they were an anti-abortion group or something, I didn't really pay attention too much. But they were instrumental in Scott Brown's win in Mass. I don't think that anyone can argue that they are not a force to be recconned with as they're spreading all across the country. I think it's a good thing when people get angry about the govt! It means that they're paying attention! And it looks like they're getting a whole bunch of other people to pay attention too and for that, good on them! I've said for a long time on CM that our govt. wasn't listening to The People! Well it appears that The People are going to make them listen in November when we absolutely *Dismantle* the house and the senate and send all those Quisling Democrats packing off to cum-bay-ah land! And there's RINO Republicans that need to go too! This will be an "equal opportunity slaughter." "GET THE FUCK OUT!!!" "NOW, YOU FUCKIN" SCUMBAGS!" Lol, man, there's going to be hundreds maybe thousands of moving vans in Washington in Jan.

TreasureKY -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:56:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery ... Oh, you bypassed earlier taxes... Not intentionally. The Declaratory Act March 18, 1766 AN ACT for the better securing the dependency of his Majesty's dominions in America upon the crown and parliament of Great Britain. WHEREAS several of the houses of representatives in his Majesty's colonies and plantations in America, have of late, against law, claimed to themselves, or to the general assemblies of the same, the sole and exclusive right of imposing duties and taxes upon his Majesty's subjects in the said colonies and plantations; and have, in pursuance of such claim, passed certain votes, resolutions, and orders, derogatory to the legislative authority of parliament, and inconsistent with the dependency of the said colonies and plantations upon the crown of Great Britain: ... be it declared ..., That the said colonies and plantations in America have been, are, and of right ought to be. subordinate unto, and dependent upon the imperial crown and parliament of Great Britain; and that the King's majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons of Great Britain, in parliament assembled, had, hash, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever. II. And be it further declared ..., That all resolutions, votes, orders, and proceedings, in any of the said colonies or plantations, whereby the power and authority of the parliament of Great Britain, to make laws and statutes as aforesaid, is denied, or drawn into question, are, and are hereby declared to be, utterly null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever. Note the parts that I've bolded above. While it is late and I'm beyond trying to dig up other specific references for you right now, there is sufficient reason to believe from the above that while the colonists were indeed already paying taxes to the Crown, they were getting tired of it. I would speculate that attempts were made by the colonists to secure an agreement of either self-government from the King or representation in Parliament. This appears to be what incensed him so much that this Declaratory Act was made. I don't find it strange that the colonists who once paid taxes to Britain without complaint, should eventually insist on being able to represent themselves... while even still paying those taxes.

domiguy -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:56:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY What so many people seem to miss is that the Tea Party is... wait for it... a MOVEMENT. It is a set of ideologies. A trend in thoughts and feelings. It is not a unified organization with recognized leaders... though there are individuals and organizations with recognized leaders who claim to be a part of the movement. A decent analogy would be the environmental movement. The environmental movement is a set of beliefs, but there is no single organization and established leaders. There is no "official" environmental movement... a concrete organization that one can contact to join or register with. There are, however, clubs, websites, organizations, individuals, and companies who claim to be a part of the environmental movement... who label themselves "green". They don't all agree, they don't all share the same vision, and their methods aren't all approved of by each other. So who officially represents the environmental movement? Do the leaders of Greenpeace accept responsibility for the activities of EarthFirst? Does the US Environmental Protection Agency take orders from the head of the Earth Liberation Front? Do you see the issue now with why some individuals here get so frustrated when talk turns to the Tea Party movement? It's infuriating when the media labels as its leader some idiot who gloms onto the Tea Party movement . There is no leader. You can't have a leader of a philosophy. When are individuals going to stop trying to perpetuate the false notion that the Tea Party is an actual organization with recognized leaders? It may be someday, but it isn't right now. Dumbest fucking drivel I have ever read.

Lucylastic -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 8:59:30 PM)
Trying to apply logic to right wingers is about as likely to succeed as teaching calculus to cows, though the cows may smell better. They don't need to understand. They hate anyone and anything that espouses compassion. All a rational human being needs do is shut up and let the right wingers talk The fools will always open their mouths and remove all doubt. Just compare their vitriolic hatred of us, with our amusement at their sheer idiocy. Nuff said. whoaaaaaa eerie...

FirmhandKY -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 9:01:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Dumbest fucking drivel I have ever read. ... well, since you seem to be the master of that particular literary art form ... Firm

heartcream -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 9:08:03 PM)
This thread sounds like, blah blah I am so smart...you dont agree with me so poo on you...blah blah I am so smart while I swat around other posters and try to sound all smarty pants yet come across all immature and mean because of bashing other posters which distinctly smells like competition and jealousy, blah blah blah, cite, cite cite, I am so smart lalalalalala I am so smart because I feel so inadequate because I have to snark out at people blah blah blah order people around to read this and answer that, I am so smart blah blah please someone tell me fast how smart I am. See how I cite? See how I write? Tell me I am smart, think I am smart.

domiguy -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 9:14:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Dumbest fucking drivel I have ever read. ... well, since you seem to be the master of that particular literary art form ... Firm Come on. It is convenient to say there are no leaders then elect leaders such as Rand Paul then cut them away as soon as they open their mouth. You say there are no leaders?....You really can't do better than that? That is your answer? Then no party has any leaders. None of us are responsible for shit.

domiguy -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 9:15:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TPEOwner Popeye, from one sailor to another...well said. Second dumbest thing I have ever read out here.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Tea Party Misconceptions... (5/23/2010 9:17:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Come on. It is convenient to say there are no leaders then elect leaders such as Rand Paul then cut them away as soon as they open their mouth. You say there are no leaders?....You really can't do better than that? That is your answer? Then no party has any leaders. None of us are responsible for shit. We are all responsible for our own actions. If you like the way that things have been, and continue to go in the US (and I don't mean just with the election of Obama), then don't do anything, and things will continue along their merry way. On the other hand, there is the TEA party movement, which is standing at the window and yelling "I'm fed up, and I'm not going to take it anymore.". Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way. Firm

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875