CNN says: Angry White People, at Tea Parties.

[itschris]

Just to address this idea that liberalism is more popular. Republicans are no longer conservative. They went liberal on us. Seriously, they went on a spending spree and let power get to their heads. They ran a liberal for the white house.The Reps need a real leader. Until that point they will lag behind. Why even cut taxes? Just leave em alone and fix the deficit. You don't cut your income when you are deficit spending. That's just silly.

The idea that Dems are soft on war is ill conceived. Bill dispatched the troops more than any other president in history. Obama won't be soft either. He's already planning on an increase of our presence in Afghanistan. Plus he kept Bush' secretary of defense. Furthermore the Iraq timetable was set by Bush first.

I don't disagree entirely with what you're saying. I'm a conservative first. I'm registered Republican because while not at all perfect... they represent at least some of how I feel about things, where the current leadership is very far from the values, ideals, ideas, and strategies I hold and believe in.

You're correct though that the Rep congress started to blow it about 3 years after 9/11. I didn't want McCain as our pick, either... but he got the nod.

My comment about the quote wasn't really about the war itself, but this idea that evil can be reasoned with, talked out... that evil deserves something other than elimination. I've grown tired of the apologies given for our country as if we are bad people. Just yesterday women in Saudi Arabia were stoned because they were unhappy and demonstrated about what essentially amounts to legalizing the rape of a woman if she's your wife. In my mind.. that's evil.

Throw rocks at women... evil.
Cut people's heads off... evil.
Let young girls burn to death for going to school... evil.
Shooting RPG's at cargo ships vowing to kill Americans... evil
Mutilating Americans and dragging them through the streets... evil.
Murdering 6 million Jews... evil
Mass Murder in Dahfur... evil

... Bush? ... yeah... not so much. Disagree with his ideals, his decisions, but people have gotten waaaaay to flippant about affixing name calling. Words mean things.

The same goes for Obama... I don't call him the ani-christ... Hitler... stupid... or anytihng like that despite the fact that I find him to be a liar, an actor, and on the opposite side of most things I believe in. But I won't equate him with evil. I may say his policies are Hitler-eque, but that's not implying he's some sort of evil tormentor.

 

[Matt34]

Reasons why I support these "Tea parties".

You cannot solve the debt crisis by creating more debt, this applies to the blue collar worker all the way up to fortune 500 companies and the government, this little tidbit is completely obvious to some, lost on the government. Obama has appointed some of the same people to his cabinet who were responsible for the debt crisis to begin with and if that doesn't raise any red flags, someone is grossly uninformed.

The bailouts and so-called stimulus packages will create debt so burdensome that it cannot be paid back by the current generation. Creating such debt is truly taxation without representation for future generations. These bailouts are the biggest heist in history and this corruption will cause hyperinflation, destruction of the middle class and will concentrate ALL the county's wealth in the hands of the financiers.

I do not work 12-14hrs a day to support failing business with my tax dollars and my daughter shouldn't have to either.

 

[majorloser]

Yeah, same people reading these threads and posting to let us know they don't like these threads. How about no clicky the linky.

Unfortunately reading these threads comes with the job

 

[markw]

Some very, very good points made here.

Reasons why I support these "Tea parties".

You cannot solve the debt crisis by creating more debt, this applies to the blue collar worker all the way up to fortune 500 companies and the government, this little tidbit is completely obvious to some, lost on the government. Obama has appointed some of the same people to his cabinet who were responsible for the debt crisis to begin with and if that doesn't raise any red flags, someone is grossly uninformed.

The bailouts and so-called stimulus packages will create debt so burdensome that it cannot be paid back by the current generation. Creating such debt is truly taxation without representation for future generations. These bailouts are the biggest heist in history and this corruption will cause hyperinflation, destruction of the middle class and will concentrate ALL of the county's wealth in the hands of the financiers.

I do not work 12-14hrs a day to support failing business with my tax dollars and my daughter shouldn't have to either.

I'll just reinforce them for those who may have missed them.

 

[Nemo128]

I'll just reinforce them for those who may have missed them.

Question. It must be asked.

If you want to go to war with a terrorist, would it not help to have a terrorist on your side? Someone who knows the way they think, the methods they use, the goals they want to achieve?

Logically you should want an insider if you want to beat some entity...

Who better to defeat the financial crisis... come on, you know where I'm going with this.

I won't go into a lion's den with a dog trainer. Unless it's Cesar Milan, he's bad @$$.

I agree with the rest though.

 

[markw]

That all depends...

Question. It must be asked.

If you want to go to war with a terrorist, would it not help to have a terrorist on your side? Someone who knows the way they think, the methods they use, the goals they want to achieve?

Logically you should want an insider if you want to beat some entity...

Who better to defeat the financial crisis... come on, you know where I'm going with this.

I won't go into a lion's den with a dog trainer. Unless it's Cesar Milan, he's bad @$$.

I agree with the rest though.

... on whose side the terrorist is on at that particular moment. Remember, a lot of these "financial terrorists" got mighty, mighty rich by taking us to the cleaners. Now you expect them to work against themselves? Please note the last highlighted part of my (Matt's) original post.

 

[speakerman39]

Question. It must be asked.

If you want to go to war with a terrorist, would it not help to have a terrorist on your side? Someone who knows the way they think, the methods they use, the goals they want to achieve?

Logically you should want an insider if you want to beat some entity...

Who better to defeat the financial crisis... come on, you know where I'm going with this.

I won't go into a lion's den with a dog trainer. Unless it's Cesar Milan, he's bad @$$.

I agree with the rest though.

Cesar for office! He is the man! No really, I just like his show.


Cheers,

Phil

 

[scubabob]

Linky no worky

This is it I think:
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnn/cnn_reporter_at_chicago_tea_party_its_anticnn_since_this_is_highly_promoted_by_the_rightwing_conservative_network_fox_114141.asp

That confrontational interview was at the Illinois capital, I believe. Check out this video for a follow up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd2tg8gxCDU&eurl=http://rightnotwrong.com/2009/04/16/cnns-susan-roesgen-picking-on-the-tea-party.aspx&feature=player_embedded

Wups, it was in Chicago.

 

[scubabob]

thanks for the links guys, any of you guys ever turned up at one?

Follow my signature link to my webshots page and go to my albums. I've been to two.

 

[Nemo128]

... on whose side the terrorist is on at that particular moment. Remember, a lot of these "financial terrorists" got mighty, mighty rich by taking us to the cleaners. Now you expect them to work against themselves? Please note the last highlighted part of my (Matt's) original post.

I wonder, are you one of the people that say the free market will work itself out? Curious.

 

[Matt34]

I wonder, are you one of the people that say the free market will work itself out? Curious.

A truely free market would but we have too many carrer representives getting their pockets lined by big corporations, unions and other speical interest groups for that to happen.

 

[jostenmeat]

A truely free market would but we have too many carrer representives getting their pockets lined by big corporations, unions and other speical interest groups for that to happen.

Honest question:

Is a truly free market and "career representative" considered to be mutually exclusive?

FWIW, I've always disliked the idea of enormous debt, ever since I was a kid. I'd run the math on interest, and I was like:

 

[Nemo128]

A truely free market would but we have too many carrer representives getting their pockets lined by big corporations, unions and other speical interest groups for that to happen.

Courtesy of my friends at econlib.org (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/FreeMarket.html):

“ Free market” is a summary term for an array of exchanges that take place in society. Each exchange is undertaken as a voluntary agreement between two people or between groups of people represented by agents. These two individuals (or agents) exchange two economic goods, either tangible commodities or nontangible services. Thus, when I buy a newspaper from a newsdealer for fifty cents, the newsdealer and I exchange two commodities: I give up fifty cents, and the newsdealer gives up the newspaper. Or if I work for a corporation, I exchange my labor services, in a mutually agreed way, for a monetary salary; here the corporation is represented by a manager (an agent) with the authority to hire.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pockets lined by corporations... sounds like the makings of a free market to me.

Pretty much every definition available of "free market" means the economics of exchanges being dictated by supply and demand while remaining free of outside intervention against transactions, with the sole exception being the maintaining of a public legal system and private party rights. This Laissez-Faire system makes it fully acceptable to use financial incentives to ensure favoritism, relating to your unions and special interest groups. The only step beyond this is an anarchistic capitalism, where government can't intervene even for public legal reasons.

The free market, as you defined it, can never work because it can never be devoid of the things you mentioned. Greed, special interests, and the absorption or destruction of competition.

A lot of people say they want to see an example of socialism that works. I want to see an example of the free market that works. Last time I checked, the world is in a financial crisis. People will be quick to throw up the "WELL, IT'S BECAUSE OF..." It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if you won every game up until the championship. If you lose the last game, you are not the champions, and no excuse or reason or "but" will change that.

I'll wait for someone to hopefully read the whole article and point out how socialism doesn't work, just so I can follow up with "How does that change the fact that right now, here, in this country, we are at the point of economic decline?" And I'll wait for the inevitable response of "It was regulation and government intervention that got us here!" Repeat, ad nauseum...

 

[Matt34]

I'll wait for someone to hopefully read the whole article and point out how socialism doesn't work, just so I can follow up with "How does that change the fact that right now, here, in this country, we are at the point of economic decline?" And I'll wait for the inevitable response of "It was regulation and government intervention that got us here!" Repeat, ad nauseum...

I'll leave a more intelligent response to the article for itschris if he so desires, I'm no economic major.

 

[Matt34]

I'll wait for someone to hopefully read the whole article and point out how socialism doesn't work, just so I can follow up with "How does that change the fact that right now, here, in this country, we are at the point of economic decline?" And I'll wait for the inevitable response of "It was regulation and government intervention that got us here!" Repeat, ad nauseum...

We haven't had a true free market in quite some time. Politicians simply trade roles with corporate players in Washington. Once they are ousted out of office they can become a lobbyist for a major corporation and if they work for a major corporation, they can have a job on the Hill.

The free market, as you defined it, can never work because it can never be devoid of the things you mentioned. Greed, special interests, and the absorption or destruction of competition.

We sure can cut a bunch of it out with reform and that would be a welcoming start.

 

[itschris]

I'll leave a more intelligent response to the article for itschris if he so desires, I'm no economic major.

I appreciate the confidence. You could write a volume here and crash the server. I'll simply make the observation that Socialism fails because 1) It takes away the incentive to take risk and create and 2) There's always someone, usually the leaders, enforceing that style of government who don't live by the same rules.

True captilism does not guarantee success but it incentivises risk, growth, and creation through a desire to better one's self.

 

[Nemo128]

We haven't had a true free market in quite some time. Politicians simply trade roles with corporate players in Washington. Once they are ousted out of office they can become a lobbyist for a major corporation and if they work for a major corporation, they can have a job on the Hill.

That's EXACTLY a free market! They are free to employ who they want for whatever cost they want to serve whatever purpose they want!!!

We sure can cut a bunch of it out with reform and that would be a welcoming start.

Regulation and reform = public or governmental intervention != FREE MARKET.

What you want, and what people WITHOUT power and money want, is a regulated market with rules of conduct to ensure that the practices of companies are in line with the best interests of the public. That is NOT a free market! The free market means that companies can act in the best interests of their owners, and the public can bugger off for all they care as long as they turn a profit.

Yes, it COULD work, as soon as those with money and power don't use it solely for personal gain without the public interest in mind. That my friend is the truest example of a pipe dream.

 

[Nemo128]

Socialism fails because 1) It takes away the incentive to take risk and create and 2) There's always someone, usually the leaders, enforceing that style of government who don't live by the same rules.

Show me an example of it failing. Simple as that. For that matter, show me communism failing. Go ahead, say Cuba, which is NOT a communist country and is not an example of socialism. Any hope that country had of true communism died with Ernesto Guevara, and any attempt at successful socialism died the second Castro decided a d*ck-measuring contest with Kennedy was more important than the well-being of his people.

Let's instead look at China, who's @$$ we're pretty much kissing and who owns most of our debt. Their "capitalist" economic system is pretty much dying now because, as the exact opposite of the US, they are an export-only country. They don't even consume 20% of their own produced goods. The second we stopped buying, they started losing money, just like the second we stopped producing and exporting, we were well on our way to ruin. That's what happens when you let financial institutions build vapor wealth on money they don't actually have.

Government ownership of industries always leads to social breakdown? Really? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Economy Tell that to Norway please, they didn't get the memo...

And I HATE reading anything on Wiki; however, the woman is about to yell at me for not being ready to watch a movie, gotta go.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

I watched this on CNN this morning. The reporter start arguing with the people in the crowd. One exchange went this way:

CNN: Why are you protesting?
Protester: High Taxes and Govt. Spending.
CNN: But don't you want to get a refund from Obama and the Govt.?
Protester: Not if we have high National debts and more job losses.
CNN: But you should want the government's money?
Protester: I want the government to stop spending.

CNN: "Well, it looks like we just have a bunch of white, angry people that do not know what they are protesting." WTF

That is not a joke, she actually said this. It was funny to see her try and argue instead of report.

The coverage of the Tea Parties has been dismal and dishonest as expected.........

 

[itschris]

A quick note to the individual who anonymously negatively repped me and called me a "moron{ because I watch FOX news... I may be a "moron" but your a ****ing coward. Be a man... post your name.