Irish Times Tea Party Article

Lockstep

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

More accurately; against taxation without elected representation.

"No taxation without representation"


/pedantry

kev9100

veritable wrote: »

Palin, et al, are by no means popular with everyone in the movement but she is in favour of fiscal responsibility and small govt. the tea party is not composed of individuals with identical beliefs. Rather, they share certain core beliefs, like i mentioned previously. Apart from their core beliefs, their opinions can be quite diverse.

Fiscal respnsibility you say? How is it fiscally responsible to let an economy dive straight into an almighty depression? Because THAT is what the stimulus averted and Palin opposed the stimulus. Also, how is Palin forfor "small govt." when she is perfectly fine about taking away the right from women to make decisions about their own body and use the federal government to define what marraige is?

Dob74

veritable wrote: »

Did anybody else read this article?

I am sick of the garbage printed each day in the Irish media about anything not leftwing in the US.
I read this article over my breakfast yesterday morning and it put me in a mood for the day. (read it online because I refuse to pay money for the Irish Times trash.)
No wonder the Irish have such a miserable view of the right. The right constantly has its position undermined in the Irish media while the left is put on a pedastol.

Image if a small fringe group of elite rightwingers took control of the US government. The Irish Times would be appalled.

As for a small fringe group of elite rightwingers the Irish Times has no problem of the PD's running this country into the ground.

I guess Ms Kennedy isnt a former member of the Tea-Party

Overheal

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I appreciate the historical evocation but lift the lid off that carafe and have a whiff of No Taxation Without Representation. As Carried by a Tea Party Movement in the wake of a Democratic Supermajority taking command of the federal government. Now who in this picture is not being represented? Could it be.... REPUBLICANS? /dramatic chipmunk.

stretchtex

To be fair I suspect that the Times is just as outraged with that looney billionaire George Soros character who bankrolls some of the far left organizations.

Mjollnir

stretchtex wrote: »

To be fair I suspect that the Times is just as outraged with that looney billionaire George Soros character who bankrolls some of the far left organizations.

Really? Which organizations, and how are they 'far' left?

Please be very specific.

Thanks!

stretchtex

The speculators duckets fund left fringe organizations such as move on and media matters.

stretchtex

George Bush and the Republicans acted like drunken sailors on shore leave when they were in power with regard to govt. spending. The Obama administration took the reins and have the US following in the path of Greece. The Tea Party is advocating fiscal responsibility and a common sense approach to government spending. I have read their platform and find myself very much in agreement although I won't buy any t-shirts or go march in DC. Folks on the left feel threatened by the foothold the movement has gained and have resorted to childish tactics to disparage the affiliation. I've known myself quite well for 36 years now and to discover that I'm a racist after reading threads like this just might keep me up tonight.

Exile 1798

stretchtex wrote: »

The speculators duckets fund left fringe organizations such as move on and media matters.

What is "fringe" or "far left" about these organisations?

I suspect from your causal use of these O'Riellyisms that you have fallen prey to the Fox machine.

stretchtex

My apologies, I'll retract my statement and concede that move on and the tea party are mainstream in nature

Exile 1798

stretchtex wrote: »

George Bush and the Republicans acted like drunken sailors on shore leave when they were in power with regard to govt. spending. The Obama administration took the reins and have the US following in the path of Greece.

If Bush was so bad, then perhaps the Tea Party might repudiate their unwavering support for him during his administration? Most of us weren't born yesterday, the Tea Party base if made of the same people who elected Bush twice. It's a nice con job they're trying to pull and I give them credit for the sheer shamelessness of it.

The Tea Party is advocating fiscal responsibility and a common sense approach to government spending.

It is indeed hard to disagree with such generalities.

Exile 1798

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

While that's true, look at the kind of article that is now appearing in a place such as Forbes for god's sake. Worse still, penned by Dinesh D'Souza, who was meant to be one of the American Right's upcoming intellectuals.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem.html

jank

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Spot on. The Tea Party at its present form is just an outlet for pissed off citizens to vent their anger. They know damm well that it was G.W Bush who spent like a drunk but gave tax breaks to everyone. Fiscal responsibility it wasn't and don't forget that the GOP had power in 2 houses of Congress for most of this time. He was the person who gave the first bailouts to the banks and motor industry.

So the GOP is JUST as complicit in this big government as everyone else. So what do they do, they just re-brand the GOP grass roots as the Tea Party movement with a couple of Liberations thrown in for window shopping.

Remember how Ron Paul was lambasted on Fox News for his foreign policy views in the presidential primaries, it is now his narrative that is gaining momentum.Palin et al just jump on a bandwagon. She would fart in front of a candle if she thought it would get a few yells of approval from her minions.

Its all a bit silly really. They stand for small government? Well where the hell were in 2004-06? They stand for civil liberties yet Beck tells us to get closer to god. What if I dint believe in god? They stand for fiscal responsibility? Well why didn't they protest on Wall st.....ever!

The tea party will destroy itself before it ever gets off the ground. Get the popcorn as if what happened in Delaware is replicated across the nation it is going to hurt the GOP more than harm the Democrats.

jank

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Damm, goto stop agreeing with you!:)

You are dead right though. It started out as a small movement but has been hijacked by the GOP for their own political aims.

20Cent

stretchtex wrote: »

George Bush and the Republicans acted like drunken sailors on shore leave when they were in power with regard to govt. spending. The Obama administration took the reins and have the US following in the path of Greece. The Tea Party is advocating fiscal responsibility and a common sense approach to government spending. I have read their platform and find myself very much in agreement although I won't buy any t-shirts or go march in DC. Folks on the left feel threatened by the foothold the movement has gained and have resorted to childish tactics to disparage the affiliation. I've known myself quite well for 36 years now and to discover that I'm a racist after reading threads like this just might keep me up tonight.

Do you have a link to their platform?
Seems that there are loads of conflicting ideas about what the tea party is about.

Black Swan

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Many Tea Party proponents will disagree with your depiction of Sarah Palin as as self-promotional politician that fails as a fiscal conservative, advocating "astronomical levels of military spending" in her support of the military industrial complex.

They will also ignore or otherwise try to white wash the fact that she first supported the $400 million "Bridge to Nowhere," only to flip-flop and oppose it after the national news media disclosed that it was a terrific pork barrel waste of federal transportation funds.

ABC Charlie Gibson Interview with Sarah Palin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cwfPl_TPjs&feature=related

The Fox News Sarah Palin will more than likely be the Tea Party (AKA Republican Tea Party faction) choice for president in 2012, no matter what they tell you today.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sticky_Fingers

jank wrote: »

Remember how Ron Paul was lambasted on Fox News for his foreign policy views in the presidential primaries, it is now his narrative that is gaining momentum.Palin et al just jump on a bandwagon. She would fart in front of a candle if she thought it would get a few yells of approval from her minions.

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

The Fox News Sarah Palin will more than likely be the Tea Party (AKA Republican Tea Party faction) choice for president in 2012, no matter what they tell you today.

Ron Paul, the archetypal libertarian doesn't seem to think much of the Tea party either seeing it for what it really is, a movement born of legitimate disaffection and outrage over government mismanagement and hijacked by self serving charlatans like Palin and Beck for their own personal gain and glory.
I don't always agree with Paul but I have immense respect for the man and would love to see him run again in 2012 but with Palin possibly in the race and currently doing a hatchet job on the term libertarianism I doubt very much that he stands much of a chance.

http://www.digitalmeetingcenter.com/ron-pauls-shocking-message-to-the-tea-party/851883/

Lockstep

There are some spot on analysis of the Tea Party in this thread (especially Jank and DF)

Once again, I'm glad the Boards.ie's politicos show their intelligence and that be they conservative, leftists or libertarians, can see the wood from the trees.

Mjollnir

This is one of the best deconstructions of the current Tea movement I've read to date, just this morning:

http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_09_12_archive.html#1590191755906502234

stretchtex

The govt in the UK is responsible for 50% or more of the income in 1 out of 3 households in the country. I can understand why Europeans would be opposed to such a movement. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Manic Moran

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It is to be pointed out that the miltary budget is one of the few things that the Constitution specifically says that Congress is to spend money on, mainly because the States are prohibited from doing so. It's all the additional things that Congress thinks is a good idea to spend money on which they should be taking a look at.

NTM

Overheal

And in fairness to conservatives if you listen to CTR you will hear the ideas that make sense, yet somehow, are not being put forth by the GOP. Why should taxes from Utah for instance be used to subsidize the operating costs of the Nevada Police through federal grants?

fontanalis

stretchtex wrote: »

The govt in the UK is responsible for 50% or more of the income in 1 out of 3 households in the country. I can understand why Europeans would be opposed to such a movement. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Europe = continent
UK is not

Overheal

fontanalis wrote: »

Europe = continent
UK is not

Though it is a microcosm of European politics.

fontanalis

Overheal wrote: »

Though it is a microcosm of European politics.

Hmmmmmmmmmm, I'd say for every similraity you may find osmethign 180 degrees the other way. It's just I hear the term European/Europe thrown about by some commentators in the US almost as if Europe is some identical monolithic block, bit of a pet peev of mine.

Victor

veritable wrote: »

Quite the opposite. The Tea party seeks to reform the Republican party. Just yesterday in Delaware we saw how the tea party candidate beat the repub supported candidate. The tea party wants to get rid of repubs known as RINOs (repub in name only), i.e. the big govt repubs like many in washington now.

I used to hear RINO as a term referring to Republicans, that becuase of (some of) their policies might otherwise be Democrats, but were members of the Republican Party.

Now I'm hearing it as a term of abuse for the bulk of Republicans that aren't "hard" enough.

Victor

Overheal wrote: »

And in fairness to conservatives if you listen to CTR you will hear the ideas that make sense, yet somehow, are not being put forth by the GOP. Why should taxes from Utah for instance be used to subsidize the operating costs of the Nevada Police through federal grants?

Sure, living within your means is important. But, in what circumstances are such payments made? Sometimes such things are desireable, e.g. if there was a large city on the boundary between the two and one was disproportionately affecting the other through drive'n'rob scenarios.

Its a bit like Dublin 100 years ago, where all the wealth was in the suburbs, but all the need in the city. Rathmines and Pembroke screwed the city out of taxes that were not rightly theirs, simply because they could (and because it benefited their land owners) and they had corrupt governments to back them up.

monosharp

veritable wrote: »

That comes across as being a bit prejudicial. Beck or Palin may be dramatic but you still haven't provided evidence of their supposed evil?

Who said anything about evil ?

Palin's an imbecile, plain and simple. She's a trained parrot at her very best. The things she has said about science and foreign relations are so incredibly ignorant that half the time you think it has to be satire.

Beck I'm more confused about. He's either a complete lunatic or a pretty good clown. I don't believe that be actually believes most of the crap he comes out with, it's just for entertainment.

As for the prejudice against the Right in America, no one needs to prejudge them. They're judged afterwards.

And as for putting the Left on a pedestal I don't believe that either. American politics has taken a dramatic step in the last 10 years. The left has moved to the centre and the right has moved further right.

Oh and just so any democrats here think I'm leaving them out, I think Joe Biden is pretty stupid has a bigger mouth than Palin. Obama promised so much and has given almost nothing. He just seems to be there.

As for the tea partiers, well what can anyone say. What do they represent ? What do they want ?

Apart from the rather loud extremists, what do the 'average' tea partiers want or represent ? Because as far as I can see they represent nothing except the extremists on the right who don't even know what they want if they can't read it off a bumper sticker.

Lockstep

Was recently reading about Christine O'Donnell (Republican/Tea Party candidate in Delaware) who used campaign funds to pay her rent/go bowling. I heard these actions defended as there's nothing illegal about using campaign funds for personal use.

Is there any truth in that at all or is it immoral without being illegal.

Black Swan

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Was recently reading about Christine O'Donnell (Republican/Tea Party candidate in Delaware) who used campaign funds to pay her rent/go bowling. I heard these actions defended as there's nothing illegal about using campaign funds for personal use.

Is there any truth in that at all or is it immoral without being illegal.

Interesting CNN vid regarding this:
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/21/odonnell-sidesteps-specifics-on-funds-says-no-truth-to-allegations/

fontanalis

Matt taibbi article
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/210904?RS_show_page=0

Memnoch

fontanalis wrote: »

Matt taibbi article
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/210904?RS_show_page=0

What an amazing article. If only I could tie up every single tea party supporter, tape their eye-lids open and force them to read this.

mgmt

Oh yeah the Tea Party is a racist, gun loving, violent organisation. Lets ban them. Lets ban Fox News too while we're at it. After all, a conflicting opinion according to Obama is dangerous to America. :rolleyes:

Denerick

mgmt wrote: »

Oh yeah the Tea Party is a racist, gun loving, violent organisation. Lets ban them. Lets ban Fox News too while we're at it. After all, a conflicting opinion according to Obama is dangerous to America. :rolleyes:

Who is saying they should be banned? By this ridiculous logic we aren't allowed to label tea partiers mind nummingly moronic, dishonest, hypocritical, rabble etc.

Overheal

mgmt wrote: »

Oh yeah the Tea Party is a racist, gun loving, violent organisation. Lets ban them. Lets ban Fox News too while we're at it. After all, a conflicting opinion according to Obama is dangerous to America. :rolleyes:

Who said they were violent?

And ironic isn't it that an opinion that conflicts with the Tea Party is classified as radical left-wing.

The hypocrisy stems from the fact that, GOP and Tea Party alike, they all claim to oppose big government, demand budget cuts, but when it comes to medicare and social security, theres barely a hum.

Are you actually going to refute the argument here, or just hold your hands up in the air and roll your eyes at everyone else in the room?

Memnoch

mgmt wrote: »

Oh yeah the Tea Party is a racist, gun loving, violent organisation. Lets ban them. Lets ban Fox News too while we're at it. After all, a conflicting opinion according to Obama is dangerous to America. :rolleyes:

Next time, try to actually read the article before tossing in pointless throw away remarks.

mgmt

Memnoch wrote: »

Next time, try to actually read the article before tossing in pointless throw away remarks.

I wasn't arsed, the author had made up his mind in the first few paragraphs so I wasn't going to waste my time on a hitpiece.

20Cent

mgmt wrote: »

I wasn't arsed, the author had made up his mind in the first few paragraphs so I wasn't going to waste my time on a hitpiece.

You should its very good.
Reading the Bank Bailout story now well worth a read also.
This Matt Taibbi guy is good.

Overheal

mgmt wrote: »

I wasn't arsed, the author had made up his mind in the first few paragraphs so I wasn't going to waste my time on a hitpiece.

So you decided not to read an article because you made up your mind that the piece wasn't worth reading because the writer of the article had made up their mind?

Do you not see the irony?

Memnoch

mgmt wrote: »

I wasn't arsed, the author had made up his mind in the first few paragraphs so I wasn't going to waste my time on a hitpiece.

If you have enough conviction in your beliefs then what are you afraid of? The reality is that the author makes a strong case backed by evidence and facts. You just don't like the truth, which is a common strand among tea party fanatics.

Try reading the entire article with an open mind and then offer any logical arguments you might have against the opinions there in, rather than just dismissing it out of hand.

Black Swan

Rolling Stone... "The Tea Party today is being pitched in the media as this great threat to the GOP; in reality, the Tea Party is the GOP."

Geeeeeee, I wonder where I've heard this before on our US Pol Cat forum?

veritable

mgmt wrote: »

I wasn't arsed, the author had made up his mind in the first few paragraphs so I wasn't going to waste my time on a hitpiece.

What do you expect from the rolling stone? i stopped reading after the remarks about all the white people. What on earth has their skin colour got to do with the tea party?

Denerick

veritable wrote: »

What do you expect from the rolling stone? i stopped reading after the remarks about all the white people. What on earth has their skin colour got to do with the tea party?

You really don't see a problem in an exclusively white middle class movement who disproportionately benefit from government spending (Social security and Medicare) that doesn't appear to have any blue collar, black or latino support?

20Cent

veritable wrote: »

What do you expect from the rolling stone? i stopped reading after the remarks about all the white people. What on earth has their skin colour got to do with the tea party?

Maybe if you read the article you would know why it is relevant.

Overheal

veritable wrote: »

What do you expect from the rolling stone? i stopped reading after the remarks about all the white people. What on earth has their skin colour got to do with the tea party?

Well when my dad claims to be Tea Party, and I hear the words "That ****ing ******" coming from the other room when he's listening to a new report about Obama; despite his repeated claims that he himself is not a racist - It makes one wonder.

veritable

Denerick wrote: »

You really don't see a problem in an exclusively white middle class movement who disproportionately benefit from government spending (Social security and Medicare) that doesn't appear to have any blue collar, black or latino support?

How do they disproportionately benefit from SS or Medicare? Surely they are the ones who should get the most from it, seeing as they've paid into it for most of their working lives?
Why does the race of the people matter? The tea party is explicitly in favour of all skin colour. Not like the National Black Caucus, for example, that is restricted to blacks only.

veritable

Overheal wrote: »

Well when my dad claims to be Tea Party, and I hear the words "That ****ing ******" coming from the other room when he's listening to a new report about Obama; despite his repeated claims that he himself is not a racist - It makes one wonder.

Well if you want to base your opinion of a movement, supported by one third of Americans, on your dad...

Does that say more about your dad or you?

:rolleyes:

mgmt

Typical, pull out the race card. The Tea Party message is simple: "Less government intrusion."

Race is just a weapon used by Obama's 1984 footsoldiers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKofFIveJG4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eP6G410Z8Y

Denerick

I've said it so many times, but I thank God every single day that I didn't have the misfortune of being born in America.