quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

... He was addressing the very platform of the Tea Party itself.

Please provide a source for the unified platform of the Tea Party.

Treasure, you are increasingly coming across as someone who is defending a group that you neither understand nor fully support. It's disingenuous of you to ask those of us who disagree with you to define your position. I have a better idea. Why don't you look it up (I did and it took less than 2 mins to find multiple sources of Tea Party platform and grievances. Hint: google "Contract from America." ) If you find something in your research that is contrary to how the Tea Party has been portrayed in this thread, then bring it here and we'll discuss it. Those of us who were wrong I'm certain will apologize.

quote:

They spent several hundred billion, and the credit markets did not ease up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

That's okay, because everybody else reading this who does google "Contract from America" will know that I absolutely could and that you were wrong. I had nothing to prove here. The burden was on you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

That's okay, because everybody else reading this who does google "Contract from America" will know that I absolutely could and that you were wrong. I had nothing to prove here. The burden was on you.

I'd have to disagree with you on the burden thing, but no matter...

If the "Contract From America" is the very platform of the Tea Party itself, care to explain how Moonhead's comment was addressing it?

And just to clarify, I'm simply requesting you back up your assertion.  I shouldn't have to provide your proof for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

I live here....It's true. Teabaggers are puppets or worse.

All of them? That is amazing. So just so I know what I am up against, how many are there in the Teabag party now? You don't have to be exact, just a close estimate will work. Shouldn't be hard, obviously if you know what they are thinking, you must know who they are, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

That's okay, because everybody else reading this who does google "Contract from America" will know that I absolutely could and that you were wrong. I had nothing to prove here. The burden was on you.

I'd have to disagree with you on the burden thing, but no matter...

If the "Contract From America" is the very platform of the Tea Party itself, care to explain how Moonhead's comment was addressing it?

And just to clarify, I'm simply requesting you back up your assertion.  I shouldn't have to provide your proof for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I think the main aim of the bail out was to stop the major banks folding up.

For the major bankers yes, not for the average person. New banks would crop up to fill the "void."
But, we can't have actual *Capitalism* now can we? Too many people living in mansions for generations. Rich people always want to remain rich.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

I'd have to disagree with you on the burden thing, but no matter...

If the "Contract From America" is the very platform of the Tea Party itself, care to explain how Moonhead's comment was addressing it?

And just to clarify, I'm simply requesting you back up your assertion.  I shouldn't have to provide your proof for you.

Thanks treasure,for confirming what we already knew,that the tea-baggers aren`t anything but deluded,easily duped republicans.

The latest strain has discontent and fake outrage mixed into the genetics.

• BS believes the "Contract From America" is the official platform of the Tea Party; and
• BS appears to not know what she says from one post to the next.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I have asked the following many times and not had a reply from anyone, well not that was serious.
"Would any of you against the bailouts, been happy to see the failure of a large bank, if it meant you lost everything ?"
Somehow I doubt it, we would have had cries of  "Why didnt the Governement DO something wah wah."

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

[
I'll offer a serious answer to your question.

Theoretically, no one would have lost everything.  For many years now the Government has guaranteed deposits in member banks through the FDIC.  Currently, the amount guaranteed is $250,000.

Technically, the Government has been doing something since 1933.

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

In a letter to the New Yorker (5-31-10), David B. Kanin, adjunct professor of international relations at Johns Hopkins, offers an interesting (to me, at least) perspective on Tea Partiers vis-a-vis the American founders.

quote:

The so-called Tea Partiers may portray themselves as heirs to the American Revolutionaries, but they are actually the descendants of those who lost the debate of 1788--in particular, the strain of constititutional opponents who violently resisted federal authority until Washington took to the battlefield against them. American Revolutionaries opposed taxation without representation. These people oppose any taxation at all.

Despite their "We the People" T-shirts, the visceral drivers of this fragmented formation are not conservatives striving to defend the Bill of Rights and strictly define constitutional language. They are anti-federalists, opposed to any meaningful central government, hostile to the principles of America's founders, and determined to re-create the loose association of local authorities that fell apart within a few years of its establishment.

Thoughts? Is Kanin on to something? Overstating his case? Who are the true heirs to America's founders?

dc,

I think this is more correlation than intentional similarity.

The Teas, after all, complain "liberals don't love America" -- they aren't out to undermine it. They are, as Kanin notes, not the conservative voice they imagine themselves to be, but they are also not purpose-driven to create governance by loose association of local authority either.

Rather, these are largely people previously unengaged in the political process sending a reactive message out of frustration, with no real understanding of its consequences and with no real plan to replace what they hope to erase.

And, of course, the people who hope to take advantage of their momentum.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Steve Wynn, CEO if Wynn Resorts, may not be a Tea Party member but he has a good handle on whats behind their grass roots movement:

quote:

Steve Wynn Takes on Washington, Vegas & EBITDA

Steve Wynn says Americans are afraid. He’s just angry. “Washington is unpredictable these days,” declares the CEO of Wynn Resorts “No one has any idea what’s next…the uncertainty of the business climate in America is frightening, frightening to everybody, and it’s delaying the recovery.”

<snip>

Wynn speaks of “wild, uncontrolled spending,” and “unbelievable, unsustainable debt”. As he plans to split his company headquarters between Las Vegas and Macau, with a bigger emphasis on Macau because of its tremendous profitability, he has no qualms about dealing with the Chinese government.

Macau has been steady. The shocking, unexpected government is the one in Washington.”

He’s concerned about the prospect of inflation, of FHA repeating the mistakes of Fannie and Freddie, and the cost to business from the new healthcare law. “We’re on our way to Greece, in the hands of a confused, foolish government,” Wynn says. “It’s got to stop. It’s got to stop.”

<snip>

Full interview here

quote:

There always comes a point when enough is enough.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Congress received a flood of communication? The will of the people? By what measure, Steven? Since when do we have Govt by referendum? You don't believe that's proper in a Republic do you? Especially at a time of perceived emergency? The will of the people was exercised in the November 2008 election following the TARP decision. They will have to wait until this November to express themselves again. Then we shall see. I get a bit nervous when I see or hear someone professing to know the "will of the people" without a voting procedure.

This raises an interesting dilemma for leaders in a republic: What do you do when "the people" seem to want one course of action, and you believe another course to be in the national interest?

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Congress received a flood of communication? The will of the people? By what measure, Steven? Since when do we have Govt by referendum? You don't believe that's proper in a Republic do you? Especially at a time of perceived emergency? The will of the people was exercised in the November 2008 election following the TARP decision. They will have to wait until this November to express themselves again. Then we shall see. I get a bit nervous when I see or hear someone professing to know the "will of the people" without a voting procedure.

This raises an interesting dilemma for leaders in a republic: What do you do when "the people" seem to want one course of action, and you believe another course to be in the national interest?

Not a dilemma at all. You were voted in to represent the interests of your constituents. Your beliefs are secondary to theirs.