Coast to coast, tea partiers promote their cause

Sep 12, 2010 Full story: Salon.com 413

Originally billed as a chance to reflect on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a series of raucous tea party rallies around the country on Sunday ended up focusing almost entirely on an event still to come -- the Nov.

Full Story
First Prev
of 21
Next Last
Don Joe

Minneapolis, MN

#423 Sep 29, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
And your analogy is partisan crap because both Democrats and Republicans are supposed to protect our money and Democrats walk away with entitlement programs for their consituents, coporate welfare for the companies in their state, and forgien aid for thier donors countries just as much as Republicans. The only difference is that whoever is in power gets more money.
Your summation of what to led the vote on the war is more partisan crap because the inteligence agencies are legaly bound to provide the same information to Congress that they do for the President. You can keep believing your partisan propoganda but it only makes you ignorant of the actual facts.
And the idea that folks do not want to risk their money in uncertain times is not partisan, it is reality. Its reality now and it was the same in 2001 and 2002, you are just so wrapped up in defending the Democrats to the accept cold hard facts.
My calling for many democrats to be put in prison is defending them? I haven't heard you call for any republicans to be put in jail. Additionally there is no equivocation between the two. The right wing media tries to tell you that bush wasting trillions for nothing is equivalent to the democrats pushing to spend billions to fix our infrastructure. The democrats are called communists and then they don't act. That is why I called them spineless.

I call the republicans criminals because they have dropped all pretense of serving the public.

You say the intelligence agencies were legally bound? How about that! the bush administration breaking the law. Who ever heard of such a thing. Just go on, keep defending the GOP and see what that gets you.

I do not give the dems a pass on voting for the war. bush's reports were lies and we all knew it at the time. Many dems tried using that as cover, but it doesn't work. They also had independent reports from the Iraq inspectors showing there were no WMDs. That Iraq had no ability to threaten anyone.

Folks risking there money in uncertain times? When did we have certain times? You don't know what will happen. If you did, you could predict the future and then why not just pick the lottery numbers?
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#424 Sep 29, 2010
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
My calling for many democrats to be put in prison is defending them? I haven't heard you call for any republicans to be put in jail. Additionally there is no equivocation between the two. The right wing media tries to tell you that bush wasting trillions for nothing is equivalent to the democrats pushing to spend billions to fix our infrastructure. The democrats are called communists and then they don't act. That is why I called them spineless.
I call the republicans criminals because they have dropped all pretense of serving the public.
You say the intelligence agencies were legally bound? How about that! the bush administration breaking the law. Who ever heard of such a thing. Just go on, keep defending the GOP and see what that gets you.
I do not give the dems a pass on voting for the war. bush's reports were lies and we all knew it at the time. Many dems tried using that as cover, but it doesn't work. They also had independent reports from the Iraq inspectors showing there were no WMDs. That Iraq had no ability to threaten anyone.
Folks risking there money in uncertain times? When did we have certain times? You don't know what will happen. If you did, you could predict the future and then why not just pick the lottery numbers?
You are truly a hypocrite. Your own words show it with every post. You presume to know what the right wing media tells us. No mention of the left leaning mainstream media.

You declare Bush wasted trillions, but fail to mention every dollar he spent was also voted for by democrats. You can't even list what he spent it on such as the new programs of NCLB and Med D. You presume that the billions (funny you write that even though it was trillions) wasted by President Obama and the deluded Republicans who agreed to it are rebuilding our infrastructure, yet there is nothing to show for it.

Now you think the Democrats should act when called communist, well they have. They acted by renewed the patriot act They failed to renew the Bush tax cuts for anyone thus raising taxes on everyone. They mandated health insurance for everyone without paying for it, they reenacted Paygo and ignored it when it was inconvenient. They have been increasingly participating the market with pseudo government corporations like Fannie Mae and Freddie MAC which now owns almost half of the private mortgages in the US. They have been buying private companies (AIG, GM Chrysler, Citibank,..) and dictating their management. They centralized the student loan program. They just ignored the rules when GM when into bankruptcy and wrote there own plan and forced the bondholders to agree to take much less then they would have under the previous precident. They dismissed cases of blatant criminal behavior for political allies. They have increased the number of people who work for the government at the same time the total number of people employed has gone down. They may not think of themselves as communist but they are moving the country in that direction.

And to top it off, you assume that Bush broke the laws because you believe the partisan hype that Congress did not receive the same information as him. You are too stupid to realize that it is not his responsibility to make sure that happens; it is the Intelligence agencies responsibility no matter what his instructions are. And to even get that far you have to believe the Democrats in congress who say they were deceived, without any proof. Isn’t that convenient.

And we have certain times when we do not expect the policy to change overnight, our politicians follow the law, prosecute crimes, stay out of the free market, and they follow their own rules.

Again, you are a partisan hypocrite. Thank you for demonstrating that so clearly.

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#425 Sep 29, 2010
x0x0x wrote:
<quoted text>"Come on teaparty"?
I'm sure lots of dems would be happy to come on you.
says the oral sperm bank.

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#426 Sep 29, 2010
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
My calling for many democrats to be put in prison is defending them? I haven't heard you call for any republicans to be put in jail. Additionally there is no equivocation between the two. The right wing media tries to tell you that bush wasting trillions for nothing is equivalent to the democrats pushing to spend billions to fix our infrastructure. The democrats are called communists and then they don't act. That is why I called them spineless.
I call the republicans criminals because they have dropped all pretense of serving the public.
You say the intelligence agencies were legally bound? How about that! the bush administration breaking the law. Who ever heard of such a thing. Just go on, keep defending the GOP and see what that gets you.
I do not give the dems a pass on voting for the war. bush's reports were lies and we all knew it at the time. Many dems tried using that as cover, but it doesn't work. They also had independent reports from the Iraq inspectors showing there were no WMDs. That Iraq had no ability to threaten anyone.
Folks risking there money in uncertain times? When did we have certain times? You don't know what will happen. If you did, you could predict the future and then why not just pick the lottery numbers?
You have a majority, why not charge any republicans you think need charged..........wimps.

“BILLARY 2016 ”

Since: Aug 07

Location hidden

#427 Sep 30, 2010
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>says the oral sperm bank.
said the guy who frequents them.
Don Joe

Minneapolis, MN

#428 Sep 30, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
You are truly a hypocrite. Your own words show it with every post. You presume to know what the right wing media tells us. No mention of the left leaning mainstream media.
You declare Bush wasted trillions, but fail to mention every dollar he spent was also voted for by democrats. You can't even list what he spent it on such as the new programs of NCLB and Med D. You presume that the billions (funny you write that even though it was trillions) wasted by President Obama and the deluded Republicans who agreed to it are rebuilding our infrastructure, yet there is nothing to show for it.
Now you think the Democrats should act when called communist, well they have. They acted by renewed the patriot act They failed to renew the Bush tax cuts for anyone thus raising taxes on everyone. They mandated health insurance for everyone without paying for it, they reenacted Paygo and ignored it when it was inconvenient....They just ignored the rules when GM when into bankruptcy and wrote there own plan and forced the bondholders to agree to take much less then they would have under the previous precident. They dismissed cases of blatant criminal behavior for political allies. They have increased the number of people who work for the government at the same time the total number of people employed has gone down. They may not think of themselves as communist but they are moving the country in that direction.
And to top it off, you assume that Bush broke the laws because you believe the partisan hype that Congress did not receive the same information as him. You are too stupid to realize that it is not his responsibility to make sure that happens; it is the Intelligence agencies responsibility no matter what his instructions are. And to even get that far you have to believe the Democrats in congress who say they were deceived, without any proof. Isn’t that convenient.
And we have certain times when we do not expect the policy to change overnight, our politicians follow the law, prosecute crimes, stay out of the free market, and they follow their own rules.
Again, you are a partisan hypocrite. Thank you for demonstrating that so clearly.
Amazing, you really do drink all the kool-aid they can serve up.

Tell me which main stream media is owned by someone not rich? Which one is not controlled by large corporations. Are you denying the corporations which own them also lobby heavily to get the politicians to give them more of our money?

If all the money bush spent was authorized by congress, how come so much of it was off the books?

What republican agreed to rebuild our infrastructure? Not a single one.

We can agree it was horrible to renew the Pat Act. As I have said before I won't support anyone who supports the Pat Act.

I don't want the bush tax cuts for only the wealthy renewed. The rich should pay a fair share. Let's go back to the Eisenhower taxation scheme, adjusted for inflation.

I will agree that giving up everything progressive in the health care bill and giving everything the GOP asked for resulted in a horrible health care bill. The republicans hate it because they think Obama will get the credit. The liberals hate it because it allows big corporations to tax the public directly without having to provide any services at all.

These are some of the reasons I did not support Obama. He is way too right wing.

We do need regulations on big corporations, otherwise they end up with all the money. Just like they are doing now. It's surprising to me to see how many sheep just let their money get stolen while defending the robbers.

I assume bush broke the law on many occasions because there is massive evidence to prove it. It's not like he was good at hiding it.
Don Joe

Minneapolis, MN

#429 Sep 30, 2010
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>You have a majority, why not charge any republicans you think need charged..........wimps.
What makes you think I have a majority? I don't belong to any political party. They are much too much the same. Both are owned by big business. Watching obama extend the Pat Act is pretty strong evidence there is no affection for the public in Washington DC. Obama didn't even fire the Attorney Generals bush appointed for purely partisan reasons. Remember when bush fired some for not charging his political opponents in court just because there was no evidence? For Obama to keep those same people in office is beyond the pale.

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#430 Sep 30, 2010
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think I have a majority? I don't belong to any political party. They are much too much the same. Both are owned by big business. Watching obama extend the Pat Act is pretty strong evidence there is no affection for the public in Washington DC. Obama didn't even fire the Attorney Generals bush appointed for purely partisan reasons. Remember when bush fired some for not charging his political opponents in court just because there was no evidence? For Obama to keep those same people in office is beyond the pale.
Remeber when Clinton fire all of them.....
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#431 Sep 30, 2010
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Amazing, you really do drink all the kool-aid they can serve up.
Tell me which main stream media is owned by someone not rich? Which one is not controlled by large corporations. Are you denying the corporations which own them also lobby heavily to get the politicians to give them more of our money?
If all the money bush spent was authorized by congress, how come so much of it was off the books?
What republican agreed to rebuild our infrastructure? Not a single one.
We can agree it was horrible to renew the Pat Act. As I have said before I won't support anyone who supports the Pat Act.
I don't want the bush tax cuts for only the wealthy renewed. The rich should pay a fair share. Let's go back to the Eisenhower taxation scheme, adjusted for inflation.
I will agree that giving up everything progressive in the health care bill and giving everything the GOP asked for resulted in a horrible health care bill. The republicans hate it because they think Obama will get the credit. The liberals hate it because it allows big corporations to tax the public directly without having to provide any services at all.
These are some of the reasons I did not support Obama. He is way too right wing.
We do need regulations on big corporations, otherwise they end up with all the money. Just like they are doing now. It's surprising to me to see how many sheep just let their money get stolen while defending the robbers.
I assume bush broke the law on many occasions because there is massive evidence to prove it. It's not like he was good at hiding it.
It sounds like you think everyone is right wing. You can't even acknowledge that the majority of the media has a left wing bias. You have to go into a rant about them being businesses. If you hate corporations so much why do you use this site, its run by a corporation? You know, if everyone is to the right of you that puts you on the far far left.

Off of the books just means how it was spend is not made public to everyone, not that the money was not voted on. You are incredibly stupid to think that they spent money without it be authorized by congress. And can you think a reason why some spending during a war should not be made public? No you are probably dumb enough to understand that either.

You are not getting anyone’s tax cut renewed, dumb ass. Because of class warfare rhetoric Congress did not extend anyone’s tax cut.

And who said companies (big and small - check your rhetoric again) don't need any regulation, that another one of you straw men. You do understand the difference between regulating an industry and taking it over don't you? Do you really think that GM and AIG are just being regulated (not owned) by the government. Do you really think that the federal government should own half of the Private mortgages in the US, Hell no. We need to start applying antitrust riles to companies and to the government. If a single company cannot have more than a certain percentage of the market then the government should abide by the same rules (healthcare, insurance, land ownership, mortgages). You cry whenever you think a big corporation behaves poorly and then cheer when the government did the exact same thing.
Be should specific with you accusation, you wrote that Bush had intelligence that was withheld from Congress, where is your proof? Show us.

You hate Bush and dislike Obama because of their abuses of power but you are not smart enough to advocate smaller government and restrictions of that power, instead you think if they only had better intensions everything would be better. Newsflash, no matter who is in if you give them the power over you they will use it, if you let them take your money they will spend it. Grow up and see the real world.
Don Joe

Minneapolis, MN

#432 Sep 30, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
It sounds like you think everyone is right wing. You can't even acknowledge that the majority of the media has a left wing bias. You have to go into a rant about them being businesses. If you hate corporations so much why do you use this site, its run by a corporation? You know, if everyone is to the right of you that puts you on the far far left.
Off of the books just means how it was spend is not made public to everyone, not that the money was not voted on. You are incredibly stupid to think that they spent money without it be authorized by congress. And can you think a reason why some spending during a war should not be made public? No you are probably dumb enough to understand that either.
You are not getting anyone’s tax cut renewed, dumb ass. Because of class warfare rhetoric Congress did not extend anyone’s tax cut.
And who said companies (big and small - check your rhetoric again) don't need any regulation, that another one of you straw men. You do understand the difference between regulating an industry and taking it over don't you? Do you really think that GM and AIG are just being regulated (not owned) by the government. Do you really think that the federal government should own half of the Private mortgages in the US, Hell no. We need to start applying antitrust riles to companies and to the government. If a single company cannot have more than a certain percentage of the market then the government should abide by the same rules (healthcare, insurance, land ownership, mortgages). You cry whenever you think a big corporation behaves poorly and then cheer when the government did the exact same thing.
Be should specific with you accusation, you wrote that Bush had intelligence that was withheld from Congress, where is your proof? Show us.
You hate Bush and dislike Obama because of their abuses of power but you are not smart enough to advocate smaller government and restrictions of that power, instead you think if they only had better intensions everything would be better. Newsflash, no matter who is in if you give them the power over you they will use it, if you let them take your money they will spend it. Grow up and see the real world.
I don't think you read my posts at all. Everyone is not right wing. The media is right wing. Just listen to them sometime and it becomes very clear.
Most people oppose the right wing attacks on the public.

I think it was 2003 when bush started the policy of not reporting how much money was being printed. Since that date we have no oversight of how much money is spent versus how much was authorized. I know you want to believe bush no matter what, but I find it impossible to even reconcile his lies into something meaningful.

In between your constant insults there is something to agree upon. Start applying anti-trust laws to corporations ( and the government as well if you like.) Why did Reagan decide to not enforce the anti-trust laws? I suppose you are too naive to understand payback when you see it.

You ask for proof that there were no WMD in Iraq??? lol, how about you prove there were. How about reviewing the reports from the inspectors looking for weapons of any kind and reporting to the world that there were none? How about you presenting even the slightest hint that there were weapons. You don't start a war because there is no evidence, you start a war with evidence, and bush had no evidence. The report said there was evidence and when that report was examined closely, it was found to be false. For example, they had satellite pictures of a truck. They said that truck could be used to transport chemical or biological weapons. It was just a picture of a truck. I am not saying intelligence was withheld, I am saying bush intentionally lied in that document to get support for his war.

I do advocate for smaller, limited government; just like it says in the constitution. I don't believe we need a military base in every nation.
Don Joe

Minneapolis, MN

#433 Sep 30, 2010
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Remeber when Clinton fire all of them.....
And bush fired them all, and Reagan fired them all.......

bush was the only one to fire them for not going after his political opponents after he had appointed them himself.

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#434 Sep 30, 2010
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
And bush fired them all, and Reagan fired them all.......
bush was the only one to fire them for not going after his political opponents after he had appointed them himself.
he fired them just as Reagan the the traffic controlers for refusing to do their job.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#435 Sep 30, 2010
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you read my posts at all. Everyone is not right wing. The media is right wing. Just listen to them sometime and it becomes very clear.
Most people oppose the right wing attacks on the public.
I think it was 2003 when bush started the policy of not reporting how much money was being printed. Since that date we have no oversight of how much money is spent versus how much was authorized. I know you want to believe bush no matter what, but I find it impossible to even reconcile his lies into something meaningful.
In between your constant insults there is something to agree upon. Start applying anti-trust laws to corporations ( and the government as well if you like.) Why did Reagan decide to not enforce the anti-trust laws? I suppose you are too naive to understand payback when you see it.
You ask for proof that there were no WMD in Iraq??? lol, how about you prove there were. How about reviewing the reports from the inspectors looking for weapons of any kind and reporting to the world that there were none? How about you presenting even the slightest hint that there were weapons. You don't start a war because there is no evidence, you start a war with evidence, and bush had no evidence. The report said there was evidence and when that report was examined closely, it was found to be false. For example, they had satellite pictures of a truck. They said that truck could be used to transport chemical or biological weapons. It was just a picture of a truck. I am not saying intelligence was withheld, I am saying bush intentionally lied in that document to get support for his war.
I do advocate for smaller, limited government; just like it says in the constitution. I don't believe we need a military base in every nation.
So in your opinion not everyone is right wing, only the media and the Republicans, and the Democrats, the tea partiers, and corporations, and our current government,....

How about this, please tell me who you think is to the left of you, so we can see how far from center your really are? Because if you think you are in the middle you are truly deluded.

So you think that President Bush started hiding the Feds activities in 2003, great you should have some proof to base this on. Please go ahead and show us the law, regulation, or Presidential directive. Also, for comparison please be sure to show us the Feds audits before 2003 for comparisons.

So you cannot show any proof that President Bush had intelligence information that was not shared with Congress. I don't know why I even asked. It was obviously just the shallow fabrication of often repeated lies that you justify your hate with.

If you are really for smaller government let’s hear what you would cut. Tells us what areas of the federal government you consider unconstitutional. Tell us what Departments you would eliminate. Tell us what current spending you would not fund.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 21
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Washington Monument Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How the 'Selma' movie made Martin Luther King J... Jan 9 fedupwiththemess 1
Venezuela 'sham' resolution renews US scorn for... (Mar '14) Mar '14 Sterkfontein Swar... 1
U.S. panel rejects changes to Washington skyline (Nov '13) Nov '13 inbred Genius 1
Immigration Rally Goes Forward on Mall (Oct '13) Oct '13 bob 23
'Million Muslim March' just a few hundred (Sep '13) Oct '13 alan 22
WWII vets get past barricades to see closed DC ... (Oct '13) Oct '13 Eric L 5
Students fight climate change, cite personal re... (Oct '13) Oct '13 SpaceBlues 1
More from around the web