The ridiculousness of the Tea Party attacks.

[ReverendHellh0und]

I only give what I get. Speak reasonably, and I'll give reason. Speak silly, and I'll give silly.

Thank you for admitting you speak silly. :shrug:

 

[ecofarm]

That's actually a good question. Answer--an elitist pinko commie rat, that's who. Or maybe just a nancy-boy. Either way, not fit to be president.

Oh please. Everyone knows the answer is: winner. Spicy mustard is awesome and ketchup is boring.

The throwing like a girl thing is disturbing though. Somethin' ain't right with the man.

 

[Boo Radley]

Thank you for admitting you speak silly. :shrug:

Always try to be honest. I see no reason to give a serious reply to a nonserious effort. so, if you want a serious reply, don't psot silly ****.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Always try to be honest. I see no reason to give a serious reply to a nonserious effort. so, if you want a serious reply, don't psot silly ****.

Ok boo. Vas eva flotsens das boat, comrade.

 

[Cameron]

Delusional people can't be successful? I have two words for you.

Lady Gaga.

Funny, I was thinking about Lady Gaga and delusionality just the other day. I actually went to NYU with Lady Gaga. We were in the same program, though we were not friends. She often struck me, during that time, as a rather delusional person. I got the sense that she believed it was inevitable that she would one day be a huge superstar. I found this delusional because of sheer improbability involved. I thought she was talented, but so are millions of other people trying to make it big in the entertainment industry.

Perhaps in large part due to the way things turned out, I now think that extreme success requires a certain level of delusion. Rational, "grounded" people don't take the risks that are necessary to make big impact. Rational people weigh the costs of pushing for something against the likelihood of success and, in most cases, become deterred from acting.

Mark Zuckerberg and The Social Network is probably another good example. I'm sure the movie is not an unbiased or wholly factual account of what actually happened, but I do accept as probably accurate the film's interpretation of Zuckerberg as an incredibly out-of-touch and delusional person, at lease at the time he started Facebook. Ironically - as with Lady Gaga - it is the very delusional nature of these types of people that seems to allow them to succeed in getting exactly what they want.

I'm not sure how well this relates to the Tea Party, or how this meandering is even relevant to this thread. But I suppose, based on the above, that I have to agree with the point raised by someone that success and delusion are not necessarily incompatible.

 

[Le Marteau]

Gee, I don't know... Maybe it has something to do with promising people they can have it all without having to work for it, and failing to tell them the price their society will pay in the future if they take the deal.

I find it interesting that you use Europe, Venezuela, and Thailand in your examples, when they are actually examples of how socialism fails.

Good Job!

The European Union is the most powerful economic bloc on the planet, with the highest GDP on the planet, and the highest standard of living on the planet -- not to mention the best healthcare, education, pension and welfare. It's also weathered the economic crisis better than the States have, as we've seen with the successful bail-out of Greece, and the Euro is now looking to rise from the second most powerful currency on Earth (after the British Pound) to the first, within a decade or two.


Pray tell, how has socialism failed?

 

[Boo Radley]

Ok boo. Vas eva flotsens das boat, comrade.

As long as you remember:

Mr. Armey and other forces in the Tea Party Movement may benefit from a refresher course on American history before they come to Harrisburg. While they invoke the Boston Tea Party of 1773 to rail against taxes and public spending, the Tea Party was actually a protest against a tax cut for a multinational corporation of the day, the British East India Company. The tax break was part of an effort by the British Crown to create a tea monopoly in the American colonies.

“The Tea Party protesters have their history wrong and their anger is misplaced,” said Sharon Ward, Director of the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center. “The Boston Tea Party was about tax fairness. Were these protesters acting in the spirit of the real Boston Tea Party, they would be protesting corporate tax loopholes that allow profitable corporations to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars in Pennsylvania taxes and leave the rest of us paying more

Tea Party Protesters Have Their History Wrong | The Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center

Along with the Tea Party has risen not only an incoherent political movement but exciting and refreshing variations on the English language. Now Flickr user Pargon has collected together many fine examples of "Teabonics", the curious pidgin that has emerged on the simple signs and crude posters handcrafted by the modern-day Poujadists:

Teabonics: the language of the Tea Party movement | Richard Adams | World news | guardian.co.uk

But the reality is that Tea Partiers engage with the Constitution in such a selective manner, and for such nakedly political purposes, that they’re clearly relying on it more as an instrument of self-affirmation and cultural division than a source of policy inspiration.

(snip)

The list goes on. Most Tea Partiers claim that the 10th Amendment, which says “the powers not delegated” to the federal government are “reserved to the states,” is proof that the Framers would’ve balked at today’s bureaucracy. What they don’t mention is that James Madison refused a motion to add the word “expressly” before “delegated” because “there must necessarily be admitted powers by implication.” In last week’s Delaware Senate debate, O’Donnell was asked to name a recent Supreme Court case she disagreed with. “Oh, gosh,” she stammered, unable to cite a single piece of evidence to support her Constitution in Exile talking points. “I know that there are a lot, but, uh, I’ll put it up on my Web site, I promise you.” Angle has said that “government isn’t what our Founding Fathers put into the Constitution”—even though establishing a federal government with the “Power To lay and collect Taxes” to “provide for the common Defence and general Welfare” is one of the main reasons the Founders created a Constitution to replace the weak, decentralized Articles of Confederation. In 2008 Palin told Katie Couric that the Constitution does, in fact, guarantee “an inherent right to privacy,” à la Roe v. Wade, but added that “individual states…can handle an issue like that.” Unfortunately, Palin’s hypothesis would only be viable in a world without the Fourteenth Amendment, which gave Washington sole responsibility for safeguarding all constitutional rights. Then there are the proposed amendments. In the current Congress, conservatives like Michele Bachmann have suggested more than 40 additions to the Constitution: a flag-desecration amendment; a balanced-budget amendment; a “parental rights” amendment; a supermajority-to-raise-taxes amendment; anti-abortion amendment; an anti-gay-marriage amendment; and so on. None of these revisions has anything to do with the document’s original meaning.

How Tea Partiers Get the Constitution Wrong - Newsweek

 

[FederalRepublic]

....While they invoke the Boston Tea Party of 1773 to rail against taxes and public spending, the Tea Party was actually a protest against a tax cut for a multinational corporation of the day, the British East India Company. The tax break was part of an effort by the British Crown to create a tea monopoly in the American colonies......

Since you're so completely lost so early in this post, there's not much point in reading the rest.

 

[washunut]

The European Union is the most powerful economic bloc on the planet, with the highest GDP on the planet, and the highest standard of living on the planet -- not to mention the best healthcare, education, pension and welfare. It's also weathered the economic crisis better than the States have, as we've seen with the successful bail-out of Greece, and the Euro is now looking to rise from the second most powerful currency on Earth (after the British Pound) to the first, within a decade or two.


Pray tell, how has socialism failed?

I want some of that this person is smoking!

 

[Boo Radley]

Since you're so completely lost so early in this post, there's not much point in reading the rest.

I see no where that I've lost anything. Your misunderstanding is not my loss. Sorry.

 

[Fiddytree]

I want some of that this person is smoking!

I am told that Das Kapital was written on a particularly potent hallucinogenic paper, that when smoked, creates great wonders.

 

[FederalRepublic]

I see no where that I've lost anything. Your misunderstanding is not my loss. Sorry.

You don't see where you've lost anything because you actually believe the Boston tea party was a protest over tax cuts for the rich.:3oops:

 

[UtahBill]

News, yesterday, it was reported that some guy has a website up "Jointheteaparty" or something like that. He has taken in a lot of TP gullibles, to the tune of half a million bucks. Not one cent has gone to any TP candidates....

 

[Councilman]

If socialists are such deluded fools why are they doing so well in Europe, and Venezuela, and Thailand etc.

The Socialists are not doing well and the policies have faled every time and place they have eve been tried.

The Liberal Socialist people have been brainwashed and diluted to the point they will not face the truth or facts ever under any circumstances even in the face of overwhelming proof they are wrong.

In this Country it's even worse because Conservatives have allowed the Liberal Socialists to run roughshod over common sense use the name calling, playing the Race card, and claims of intolerance, all to intimidate the majority of the people to sit back and allow the passage, of laws an policies we should have stood up to for the last 50 years.

 

[Boo Radley]

You don't see where you've lost anything because you actually believe the Boston tea party was a protest over tax cuts for the rich.:3oops:

No. Once again a little knowledge prevents you from seeing the entire picture. And leads you to a misreading:

In 1767, to help the East India Company compete with smuggled Dutch tea, Parliament passed the Indemnity Act, which lowered the tax on tea consumed in Great Britain, and gave the East India Company a refund of the 25% duty on tea that was re-exported to the colonies.[11] To help offset this loss of government revenue, Parliament also passed the Townshend Revenue Act of 1767, which levied new taxes, including one on tea, in the colonies.[12] Instead of solving the smuggling problem, however, the Townshend duties renewed a controversy about Parliament's right to tax the colonies.

Boston Tea Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This why we were taxed, so it plays a role in the objection. However, as stated in the articles, the objection was about fairness, specifically about being taxed without representation (we have represntation today). As the tea party can't possibly be protesting because they are not represented, which would easily be shown false, we should dig further into history, or their lack of understanding of that history. You show your misunderstanding rather clearly.

 

[FederalRepublic]

No. Once again a little knowledge prevents you from seeing the entire picture. And leads you to a misreading:

In 1767, to help the East India Company compete with smuggled Dutch tea, Parliament passed the Indemnity Act, which lowered the tax on tea consumed in Great Britain, and gave the East India Company a refund of the 25% duty on tea that was re-exported to the colonies.[11] To help offset this loss of government revenue, Parliament also passed the Townshend Revenue Act of 1767, which levied new taxes, including one on tea, in the colonies.[12] Instead of solving the smuggling problem, however, the Townshend duties renewed a controversy about Parliament's right to tax the colonies.

Boston Tea Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This why we were taxed, so it plays a role in the objection. However, as stated in the articles, the objection was about fairness, specifically about being taxed without representation (we have represntation today). As the tea party can't possibly be protesting because they are not represented, which would easily be shown false, we should dig further into history, or their lack of understanding of that history. You show your misunderstanding rather clearly.

From your link:

"The East India Company initially sought to have the Townshend duty repealed, but the North ministry was unwilling because such an action might be interpreted as a retreat from Parliament's position that it had the right to tax the colonies.[22] More importantly, the tax collected from the Townshend duty was used to pay the salaries of some colonial governors and judges.[23] This was in fact the purpose of the Townshend tax: previously these officials had been paid by the colonial assemblies, but Parliament now paid their salaries to keep them dependent on the British government rather than allowing them to be accountable to the colonists.[24]"

Thank you for providing the link. It was very useful in proving my point.

 

[Boo Radley]

From your link:

"The East India Company initially sought to have the Townshend duty repealed, but the North ministry was unwilling because such an action might be interpreted as a retreat from Parliament's position that it had the right to tax the colonies.[22] More importantly, the tax collected from the Townshend duty was used to pay the salaries of some colonial governors and judges.[23] This was in fact the purpose of the Townshend tax: previously these officials had been paid by the colonial assemblies, but Parliament now paid their salaries to keep them dependent on the British government rather than allowing them to be accountable to the colonists.[24]"

Thank you for providing the link. It was very useful in proving my point.

Doesn't really prove your point at all. I'm not even sure why you think it does. If you explain, perhaps I can help you better. But I will repeat my response so you may address it in context:

This why we were taxed, so it plays a role in the objection. However, as stated in the articles, the objection was about fairness, specifically about being taxed without representation (we have represntation today). As the tea party can't possibly be protesting because they are not represented, which would easily be shown false, we should dig further into history, or their lack of understanding of that history. You show your misunderstanding rather clearly.

Just curious, do you read all the links? Or do you look for someothing you can twist, in one link, and then say that invalidates all links? You're misreading this one, but as there were others, I'm not sure how your thinking is allowing you to by pass them. Perhaps you can explain this?

 

[Moot]

The Socialists are not doing well and the policies have faled every time and place they have eve been tried.

The Liberal Socialist people have been brainwashed and diluted to the point they will not face the truth or facts ever under any circumstances even in the face of overwhelming proof they are wrong.

In this Country it's even worse because Conservatives have allowed the Liberal Socialists to run roughshod over common sense use the name calling, playing the Race card, and claims of intolerance, all to intimidate the majority of the people to sit back and allow the passage, of laws an policies we should have stood up to for the last 50 years.

Well, as soon as the conservative fascists take over congress in January 2011, then we'll see if their policies are any better. However, history has already proven it was their policies that created the mess we are in now, so don't count on things getting any better now that they are back. In fact, it will probably get worse.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

The Socialists are not doing well and the policies have faled every time and place they have eve been tried.

The Liberal Socialist people have been brainwashed and diluted to the point they will not face the truth or facts ever under any circumstances even in the face of overwhelming proof they are wrong.

In this Country it's even worse because Conservatives have allowed the Liberal Socialists to run roughshod over common sense use the name calling, playing the Race card, and claims of intolerance, all to intimidate the majority of the people to sit back and allow the passage, of laws an policies we should have stood up to for the last 50 years.

Hai, check my sig, welcome to teh internets. You fit hitler so well I had to gift you this wonderful portrait of him. Everything you said fits so tightly into nazism all snug and warm and when you read this you will more likely go into self denial. Aww.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

Well, as soon as the conservative fascists take over congress in January 2011, then we'll see if their policies are any better. However, history has already proven it was their policies that created the mess we are in now, so don't count on things getting any better now that they are back. In fact, it will probably get worse.

It's like the world doesn't operate off of mixed economies or something.

DUUUUR IMA STOP DA COMMIES!

Seriously its sad, the world wants you to stop now.

 

[Wiseone]

Well, as soon as the conservative fascists take over congress in January 2011, then we'll see if their policies are any better. However, history has already proven it was their policies that created the mess we are in now, so don't count on things getting any better now that they are back. In fact, it will probably get worse.

They aren't fascists, geeze stop this over-reaction and over the top name calling.

 

[Moot]

They aren't fascists, geeze stop this over-reaction and over the top name calling.

Actually, they are. But if conservatives don't like being called fascists, then they can stop calling liberal's "socialists".

The Socialists are not doing well and the policies have faled every time and place they have eve been tried.

The Liberal Socialist people have been brainwashed and diluted to the point they will not face the truth or facts ever under any circumstances even in the face of overwhelming proof they are wrong.

In this Country it's even worse because Conservatives have allowed the Liberal Socialists to run roughshod over common sense use the name calling, playing the Race card, and claims of intolerance, all to intimidate the majority of the people to sit back and allow the passage, of laws an policies we should have stood up to for the last 50 years.

 

[Wiseone]

Actually, they are. But if conservatives don't like being called fascists, then they can stop calling liberal's "socialists".

If you have a standard you'd like others to live up to then live up to it yourself. No one listens to a "Do as a say, not as a do" kind of person. I mean would you be happy if someone asked you to stop talking trash to them while they continued to talk trash to you until they were content you had honestly stopped?

But of course there will always be people like CouncilMan, you can't let the crazies get to you and lump more rational Reps into the same batch.

 

[Moot]

If you have a standard you'd like others to live up to then live up to it yourself. No one listens to a "Do as a say, not as a do" kind of person. I mean would you be happy if someone asked you to stop talking trash to them while they continued to talk trash to you until they were content you had honestly stopped?

We just had an election that proves you wrong.

But of course there will always be people like CouncilMan, you can't let the crazies get to you and lump more rational Reps into the same batch.

My reply was to CouncilMan. Since you so conveintly ignored his defining liberals as socialists and lumping all liberals into the same batch, then likewise you shouldn't have a problem ignoring my defining conservatives as fascists. Otherwise, it just looks like you have a double standard. But of course, if you have a well reasoned and fact based argument as to why you think today's conservatives aren't fascists, then by all means spit it out, because I have a long list that suggests they are in every sense of the word, Fascists.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Doesn't really prove your point at all. I'm not even sure why you think it does. If you explain, perhaps I can help you better. But I will repeat my response so you may address it in context:

This why we were taxed, so it plays a role in the objection. However, as stated in the articles, the objection was about fairness, specifically about being taxed without representation (we have represntation today). As the tea party can't possibly be protesting because they are not represented, which would easily be shown false, we should dig further into history, or their lack of understanding of that history. You show your misunderstanding rather clearly.

Just curious, do you read all the links? Or do you look for someothing you can twist, in one link, and then say that invalidates all links? You're misreading this one, but as there were others, I'm not sure how your thinking is allowing you to by pass them. Perhaps you can explain this?

You said the tea parties were about tax cuts for the corporation, which your link clearly does not support. You further said the Townshend duties were put in place to make up for the tax cuts for the corporations. That's also not true (which I put in bold text for you to read). The taxes were used both as a tool and a symbol of control (also in bold text).

If you took more time to read your material and collect your thoughts, you might not be wrong so often.

As for taxation without representation, that's not what you initially said the Boston tea party was about. Even though you were being disengenuous, I'll answer your question. Most people in the tea party feel like they don't have representation.