The Tea Party

Barack Obama rejuvenated the race card by allowing himself to be sold on the block as a black man in 2008. Now he's the king of race card players. Maybe in another 40 yrs, we'll be back to where we were in 2007.

 

That (above) was just stupid to say.

You're on 'ignore'.

 

Oh no the Johnny c ignore list. I must have made a point that got your mental defenses up.

 

That's silliness; and screen real estate is at a premium.

You are on 'ignore'.

Bye.

 

Thought Dixiecrats were actually Democrats who did not jump on board with the Civil Rights movement. Also this era severely hurt the republican image with the black vote. It can be repaired over time, but it will take a long time, and probably something drastic to happen
However I still hold on that racism is not part of the party platform anymore and that racism is just as common in liberals as it is conservatives and moderates alike.

 

I know what you mean, but the remnants of that "platform" are very persistent; there is no denying that. That's not only with "Republicans"... but on the Right, in general.

 

Only a fool would argue that racism does not exist on the right, and the left as well........but is it as wide spread as some will lead you to believe?
I have troubles believing that. Not everything is a race issue, but it seems if a black man and a white man get involved in a confrontation, or a black woman is denied work, the media and some leaders will try to turn it into a white on black hate crime or something, or the woman, or man will cry racism.
Now in cases where two equally qualified(same experience, education level) things get murky, but again it's not always about race even in those situations.
I know I went a little off topic, but felt the need to express that view.

 

Actually I did say what I meant to say, you just chose to ignore it and cut it out. But really, you brought race in a topic that has nothing to do with race. My assumption is that once your off the race track, you don't have much in the way of opinions. That's fine, you can be a one issue type of guy, but with so many threads here, why not stick to the race based ones? You've contributed nothing but distraction to this thread.

 

What people do is try so VERY HARD to allow those on the Right their racist political devices.

I don't see racism coming from the Left as a frequently used political tool. The Right is downright reprehensible, when it comes to that.

 

and i don't see that at all. decades ago sure, but in today's politics no. Do you have some high profile names in mind, maybe an agenda that promotes racism?

 

No racism from the Left? Have you forgotten Eric Holder?

 

Come on man, I don't need to spoon-feed to you what's been going on in front of all of us.

I'm not going to do that.

That 'racism' is a major problem coming from the Right.

I want NOTHING to do with their agenda; certainly not anymore.

 

then I will just chalk it up as an opinion and leave it alone my friend

 

Ah. Although, I would like to point out, ethanol is grain alcohol, and I might call this company to see if this corn is food-safe, in which case, it could be used for both fuel ethanol and something such as Jack Daniel's. Thus, there may be other markets for the corn.

That's using current costs. The cost of solar panels has dropped over 80% in the past decade. There is nothing to suggest they won't drop further.

Landfills produce methane which is natural gas. Some landfills have started capturing that gas to then provide extra power to their local grids. Livestock also produces methane, and is thus an untapped source of methane. I could see dairy cows having a methane collector that is harvested whenever they are milked.

You call it being stubborn, I call it being optimistic about the fact that solar power has fallen and will continue to fall once the economy recovers. I'm all for having natural gas replace dirtier sources of power, but don't put all the eggs in the natural gas basket. There are other sources of energy that are proven and untapped in the United States.

I actually support voter ID laws, but since they're mandated for election, they should be either dirt cheap or free to acquire for all Americans.

 

Probably feed it to livestock. I am not one of those who complain about new varieties. I think agri science is the bees knees.

But we have already outsourced to china. Where will the rest of the savings come from? Even top solar firms say 5% of the energy mix in 40 years and that is when they are bragging. It now costs 10 times what FPL charges me, and we had a rate bump because they had to install some solar. Mowed down wetlands to do it:
http://www.rentoid.com/blog/2011/06/29/the-falling-costs-of-solar-energy/

No there is more then just methane that comes out that end. Also intermittent. Just drill for it. The world will survive.

Not all eggs. Let the economy decide what energy sources are ready and we go from there. In the meantime lets get a few hundred thousand people back to work in great jobs and lower energy costs so companies have more overhead savings to put towards workers. Energy costs by the way are a large part of manufacturing costs and an area where we could gain some competitive advantage against our euro counterparts. They got jobs we can take and France is looking to kick out the rich so maybe there is another opportunity there.

Oh I agree. If the government wants you to carry an I for their purposes you should only have to pay the cost of the plastic. $1 sounds fine for me.

 

Indiana's Voter ID law was OK'd by the courts. All you have to do is go to the BMV and get a photo ID. It's free. But you do have to present some sort of documentation that you are who you claims to be and give an address. BMV uses Google street view to be sure it isn't Wrigley Field you are claiming as an address. IIRC, the photos are video and can be checked for duplicates.


But what does this have to do with the TEA Party agenda of less federal spending, less taxation, and less government?

 

Voter ID laws are 100% unconstitutional.

Their agenda makes no sense.

Less Federal spending serves no purpose other than less services. Less taxation means less services. Smaller government means... less services.

If the Tea Party ever was taken seriously, our country would be set back 100 years. We wouldn't have inspections / regulations for our food, water, and environmental issues, nor would we have a publicly funded transportation system.

 

There is not such thing as a Tea Party, in the sense that there is no collective movement or political party. Politicians who are identified in the US press as being tea party darlings don't lead a movement and are ususally political opportunists.

Political opportunism plays a big role in the Tea Party.

After the 2008 election, that element of the American far right wing that cheered for George W Bush right up to the day he left the White House felt marooned. These are the people who showed up at Sarah Palin rallies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TTs_PjWwv8

These people have been courted assidulously by the Republican Party for decades, and now they felt left behind.

The Party needed a way to reengize this base. They found it in the fear and anxiety that followed the 2008 financial collapse.

There had been a tea party all along. It was a small, begnign fringe group that had been associated with Texas Congressman Ron Paul. It's planks were balanced budgets, nativism and isolationism. They wanted the US to go back to the McKinley era.

Conservative and Republican political operatives hijacked the tea party name and made it into a national astroturf movement. TAlk radio and Fox News were its cheerleaders. All over the country, tea party groups instantly appeared, fully funded, with working websites, bus tours, printed literature, training on how to do political gurella warfare, and lots of cash.

If you want an analogy, you might think of them as an American equivilant to the British National Party, but only of that party was driving the agenda of Labour or the Conservatives.

The cash came from the big money donors in the GOP, and it was laundered through a rapidly growing number of conservative groups dedicated to raising out of state money for GOP political candidates.

In 2010, the amount came to nearly $100 million.

All of the major tea party organizations are funded by corporate donors.

This is not a grass roots movement.

But it is cleverly disguised to appeal to the least sophisticated voters in rural and white America. Tea party members are nearly 100% white, and nearly 100% Republican. There is no political diversity here.

Here are some shots from tea party rallies. Any resemblance between them and the comments at the Sarah Palin rally above is probably not coincidental!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S38VioxnBaI

The racism that was on display in the Sarah Palin rally video above, is oft repeated in tea party circles. Cleverly, the GOP has cloaked the latent racism in opposition to policy not the man himself.

After the 2010 mid term elections, the loose corporate money suddenly dried up, and a movement that was neither cohesive or led started feuding with itself.

The tea party movement had already become a haven for nativists, isolationists, gold bugs, the politically parnoid and quite a few bigots. Although it preaches fiscal conservatism, it offers no real plans, and most of its supporters did not care about debt before 2009.

The tea party movement was a rallying cry for the far right wing of the Republican Party's base in 2010. It delivered them electoral victories.

The problem for the GOP and the rest of the world is that these radicals are driving the Republican party now.

They nearly caused international financial chaos by forcing the US to the brink of default, and they shut the government down last fall.

 

Taxcutter says:
The agenda of less spending, less taxation, and less government makes perfect sense to taxpayers. To moochers...probably not.

 

Thanks for injecting some reasonableness into the discussion!!

 

Why are the unconstitutional? The states are allowed reasonable measures to secure the accuracy of elections. Why is the left always on the side of cheating? Why can't you win a fair election?

 

Except the talking heads, Palin, santorum, bachman. They gave the appearance of what TFM posted.

 

only one who wants more services are the ones who don't want to do for them selves, and would rather rely one the government to do it for them

 

The right to vote in this country is NOT CONDITIONAL, it is explicit. There is no debate. Voter ID laws are unacceptable.

Voting identity is irrelevant. Hell, votes can be anonymous in ANY poll. The only thing that needs to be proven is citizenship, which does not require a photo identification.

 

Of COURSE it's conditional. Do you think felons vote? There's a condition right there, so your point is shot down like the stupidity it is.

lolwut?