Tea Party

“MarkO, I hope you don’t get pleasure from knowing that you’ve just made me puke!


Yeah, those OTHER guys are liars! That's the spirit!


Do you think we should engage in slap fights and fart jokes while we think about how we can be of more benefit to society? Well I hope you don’t support the creation of laws forcing me to do so because I value the freedom I still have to spend my time as I chose.
last edited: 4/21/09 11:50:43 AM”

“I just want to know when it became "bad form" for people to assemble in order to protest something they disagree upon in Government?

The MAGGOT infested dope smoking lefties have done it for years to the adulation of the media...why is it a crime now?”

“I can’t speak for everyone, but Garofalo seems to think that rounding up “conservatives” and sticking them on reservations with diseased blankets would be a good start. I wonder how people with views differing from hers would feel?

Well why don’t we look at how Russell Means feels? You know, the guy who actually experienced situations like those described in Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. He’s a man who has experienced government lies and oppression. And, like me, being Lakota he brings an interesting perspective to the table.

What does he think? Let’s look at his website:

http://www.russellmeans.com/

Under “Speeches” he has a fine one called, For America to Live, Europe Must Die!

Holy Cow! I’ll bet that causes some emotional knee-jerks! What does he mean?

Instead of judging a book by its cover, or practicing contempt prior to investigation (because we all know those are the failed strategies of human failures), why don’t we read it…hmmmmm…


For those folks who actually possess an attention span, it’s interesting to get an American Indian viewpoint. I wonder what political party he finds most in tune with his spiritual beliefs?”

“51% View Tea Parties Favorably, Political Class Strongly Disagrees
Monday, April 20, 2009

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans have a favorable view of the “tea parties” held nationwide last week, including 32% who say their view of the events is Very favorable.

Thirty-three percent (33%) hold an unfavorable opinion of the tea parties according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure.

While half the nation has a favorable opinion of last Wednesday’s events, the nation’s Political Class has a much dimmer view—just 13% of the political elite offered even a somewhat favorable assessment while 81% said the opposite. Among the Political Class, not a single survey respondent said they had a Very Favorable opinion of the events while 60% shared a Very Unfavorable assessment.

One-in-four adults (25%) say they personally know someone who attended a tea party protest. That figure includes just one percent (1%) of those in the Political Class.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? Sign up now. If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates also available on Twitter.

David Axelrod, a top adviser to President Obama, on Sunday characterized the protests in dozens of cities on the day federal income taxes are due as potentially “unhealthy.”

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Americans say they followed recent new stories about the tea party protests, including 32% who followed Very Closely. Forty-one percent (41%) say they didn’t follow the reports.

Republicans were far more interested in the protests than others. Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republicans followed news reports, with 50% following Very Closely. By comparison, just 47% of Democrats and 50% of adults not affiliated with either major party say they followed the reports at least somewhat closely.

Just 32% of the Political Class was following along. Among those with populist, or Mainstream, views, 68% were paying attention.

While 83% of Republicans and a plurality (49%) of unaffiliated Americans have a favorable view of the tea party protests, only 28% of Democrats say the same.

The Political Class and Mainstream classifications are determined by the answers to three questions measuring general attitudes about government.

Most Americans trust the judgment of the public more than political leaders, view the federal government as a special interest group and believe that big business and big government work together against the interests of investors and consumers. Only seven percent (7%) share the opposite view and can be considered part of the Political Class.

On many issues, there is a bigger gap between the Political Class and Mainstream Americans than between Mainstream Republicans and Mainstream Democrats. That was true on the tea parties, but Mainstream Republicans do express a more positive view of the protests than Mainstream Democrats. Still, a majority (54%) of Mainstream Democrats had a favorable opinion of the tea parties.

While Americans are slightly more optimistic about the economy’s improvement in the short term, they are growing more concerned that the government may do too much to try to help things along.

Forty-five percent (45%) of Americans adults now think most people get involved in politics to protect themselves from what the government might do.

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free)… let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.

See survey questions and toplines. Crosstabs available for Premium Members only.”

“You surround your lunch, but that's about it.”

“13% of Tea-Baggers are MAGGOT libbies”

“Didn't we use to have a Drill Instructor Troll around here?”

“drill, drill drill. Is that all?”

“Olbermann can't hold my attention at all. I haven't watched him for long. I really can't say whether I think he is more accurate than O'Reilly. He is just as strident, but O'Reilly is the better entertainer.”

“Olbermann still thinks Bush is President, lol.”

“Keith at least talks about things other than himself, but he talks about Bill almost as much as Bill does.”

“$578,661 for Union homeless questioned

UNION - The Town of Union is getting $578,661 in federal Recovery Act funding for a homeless problem that may not exist within its borders.
Advertisement

The money is coming from the federal Housing and Urban Development program to pay for homeless prevention and emergency shelter programs.

Union did not request the money and does not currently have homeless programs in place in the town to administer such funds, said town Supervisor John Bernardo.

"We were surprised," Bernardo said. "We've never been a recipient before."

Bernardo said he isn't aware of any homeless issue in the largely suburban town.

The City of Binghamton is receiving $955,655 in emergency shelter and homeless funding. Most homeless shelters and the agencies that serve them are located in the city.

The federal Recovery Act has come under attack by Republicans and other fiscal conservatives who say supporters of the law are giving taxpayer money to state and local governments that may not need such funding.

Adam Glantz, a HUD spokesman, said the homeless funds were distributed based on population, housing needs and some poverty statistics. The federal agency used the same formula for the homeless money distribution that it uses to distribute Community Development Block Grant money.

In the 2000 U.S. Census, Union's population was 59,786, including the villages of Johnson City and Endicott. Binghamton's population was 53,008 in 2000, statistics show. Union and Binghamton are Broome's largest municipalities based on population.

HUD also distributed $378,254 in CDBG money to Union, along with $624,800 to Binghamton. Both amounts came from HUD's portion of the Recovery Act. The Town of Union has participated in the CDBG program in the past, using the money for parks and other community development projects, Bernardo said.

For now, Bernardo said he and other town officials are looking into why the town got the homeless prevention money and how - and even if - the money can be used by the town.

Glantz said the money can be used for people who may be in danger of losing their jobs and their residences.

"We hope and encourage these new grantees to develop creative strategies for the funding," Glantz said of Union's homeless grant.

http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20090305/NEWS01/903050353/1001”

“One FEMA Employee will Oversee $100 Million Program

The stimulus fund will give $100 million to the Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFSP), a public-private organization that was created in 1983 to help provide for the needs of hungry and homeless Americans. The program, which is supposed to be overseen by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), awards grants to local social service organizations. It sounds like a good idea, but there’s one catch: the EFSP has only one employee.

A recent report by the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security put the problem succinctly: “Staff within the Emergency Food and Shelter Program declined from six in 1997 to one in 2008, According to FEMA program officials, this decline led to a significant decrease in financial and program monitoring. Having one staff member responsible for both monitoring activities reduces FEMA’s ability to ensure the appropriate use of grant funds.” A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security told The Center for Public Integrity that, despite the influx of $100 million, there are no plans to add to EFSP’s staff of one.

http://www.allgov.com/ViewNews/One_FEMA_Employee_will_Oversee_100_Million_Dollar_Program_90414”

“In Nevada, lawmakers agreed that strings attached to the stimulus would require them to pay the prevailing union wage -- $46 to $57 an hour -- to construction workers who will fan out to make buildings more energy- efficient. Still under debate is whether the state should pay equally high wages to workers hired under a locally funded weatherization program, which typically pays $15 an hour.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123637916772457309.html”

“There was no media investigation of the payola scams Obama participated in. Who thought it would stop?”

“Do you think we should engage in slap fights and fart jokes while we think about how we can be of more benefit to society? Well I hope you don’t support the creation of laws forcing me to do so because I value the freedom I still have to spend my time as I chose.
last edited: 4/21/09 12:50:43 PM”
arclite
1:22:35 PM
4/21/09

Huh?
Forcing you to do what?
Engage in slap fights and fart jokes?

".....how we can be of more benefit to society?"

Well............we can start by raising our kids to be good and decent members of society ........contributors and not burdens to society.

And we can enjoy life and stop being victims and not be all ate up with this "tea-baggin" "woe is me" stuff.”

“I'll leave you people locked up together in your two party prison. 66.2*F 32% hum.

Tea for two party prison. Have fun.

Hey Occam , hand me that razor.
last edited: 4/22/09 8:09:43 AM”

“DrunkO the way you look at the Tea Party crowd is pretty much the way we look at put'near every protest you clowns do...you know that right?”

“Two party sewage spill alert . Beep beep Ba Deep!!1”

“ROTFLMAO.....”

“I'll thank you to keep your little fanticies to yourself”

“not that there's anything wrong with that......”

“oy vey

”

“YEAH...LOL, its sad when High School teachers get out in public.....”

“Probably a stock broker....”

“That dudes a phireman, he's got his left hand in that libertarians pocket.”

“Maybe he's hoplophobistic.”

“Nah probably some former 60's drunk whose wife pays the bills.....”

“Or perhaps an AWOL "father" who is stalking the kids of a single mom with pre-version on his "mind".”

“Hey kids! Newt's organizing another tea party:

Then, we should make July 4, 2009 "American Freedom Day." Tea Party activists across America should plan to go out and recruit supporters from every Fourth of July celebration in their community.

Errr, don't we already have a name for July 4th?

Makes almost as much sense as renaming Christmas "Happy Holiday Day."”

““DrunkO the way you look at the Tea Party crowd is pretty much the way we look at put'near every protest you clowns do...you know that right?



Even though I'm impressed with your Zardoz picture, MarkO, I'm afraid you may be having trouble understanding my humorous poke at your inability to connect the dots.

When you support wealth redistribution programs like public housing, welfare, food stamps, government healthcare, and all the myriad government redistribution programs that already exist, you are forcing control over my life.


“This makes people believe that that anything which, like economic planning, affects only our economic interests cannot seriously interfere with the more basic values of life.

This, however, is an erroneous conclusion. Economic values are less important to us than many things precisely because in economic matters we are free to decide what to us is more, and what less, important. Or, as we might say, because in present society it is we who have to solve the economic problems of our lives. To be controlled in our economic pursuits means to be always controlled unless we declare our specific purpose. Or, since when we declare our specific purpose we shall also have to get it approved, we should really be controlled in everything.

The question raised by economic planning is, therefore, not merely whether we shall be able to satisfy what we regard as our more or less important needs in the way we prefer. It is whether it shall be we who decide what is more, and what is less, important for us, or whether this is to be determined by the planner. Economic planning would not effect merely those of our marginal needs that we have in mind when we speak contemptuously about the merely economic. It would, in effect, mean that we as individuals should no longer be allowed to decide what we regard as marginal.”

The Road to Serfdom (pg 100) by F.A. Hayek.


The ends (an "equitable" distribution of wealth across society - with the underlying worry of staving off a revolution by envious citizens) of people who believe in redistribution policies have good and bad consequences.

Government mandated redistribution policies force me to lose my choice to not enable people who I feel are making unhealthy choices for what is good for society. People who want to force the redistribution of my wealth through taxation and price and wage controls discount my concerns.

I have reached some conclusions through observation:

Statistics say that most homeless people have addiction problems. Providing them shelter is a nice short term solution to the problem of their making the choice to rent a room or buy alcohol or drugs. I don't want to enable someone who chooses to kill themselves with alcohol or drugs. And I know I cannot control how an addict chooses to spend his money.

My daughter should learn money-management skills so that she is not looking to society to bail her out and support her in her old age. Giving her money (in order to more "equitably" bring her salary in line with someone who works hard and saves) enables her to be lazy and make a less important contribution to society. And I know I cannot control how she chooses to spend her money.

If giving a guy money (in order to more "equitably" bring his salary in line with someone who works hard and saves) enables him to buy tattoos over paying his electric bill, this enables him to be irresponsible and make a less important contribution to society. And I know I cannot control how he chooses to spend his money.

Raising minimum wage to help a guy works at McDonald's, and has six kids (in order to more "equitably" bring his salary in line with someone who works hard and acts responsibly), enables him to be irresponsible and damage society. And I know I cannot control the choices he makes in life especially when he does not suffer the full consequences of his actions.



70% of black children are born to single mothers. Something hasn't worked. This is damaging to society.

45% of healthcare is now provided by government. "Coincidentally", the cost of healthcare has risen as government has assumed a greater burden of providing healthcare.


MarkO, if you refuse to see that taxation to force policies of government growth, poorly thought out business regulation, and government redistribution of wealth, have had some seriously negative consequences, just remember that I can't control your emotional makeup nor your desire for education.
last edited: 4/23/09 9:32:24 AM”

“Don't you ever say man milk again, mister.”

“DANG! Kleetn, you've found me out...again.

Alliteration is pretty funny. I always admire it's appropriate application.”

“"When you support wealth redistribution programs like public housing, welfare, food stamps, government healthcare, and all the myriad government redistribution programs that already exist, you are forcing control over my life."

Those programs, for what its worth, subsidize low wages and take business "off the hook" for living wages.

Just to be devil's advocate:
If "living wages" were required then some of those government subsidies that send you into emotional fits could be eliminated, ArcO.”

“MarkO, you don’t want me to run your life by taking your wealth and using it to improve society as I deem fit according to my moral beliefs. At least I make that assumption. Maybe you want someone to tell you what to do?

Or maybe your motives are purely selfish. Maybe you have so little, or so much, wealth that taking a larger percentage of it wouldn’t affect the choices you make in your life?

Maybe you believe that a reduction in your family budget is never an option when discussing finances? Maybe you feel a desire to please everyone? Maybe you want to create an image of being a great person for wanting to save others from themselves?




My philosophy says that I should not try to control your life. I don’t want to control your life. I have enough of a job managing my own affairs. What is it about your psychological makeup that tells you to believe you know what’s best for society?

Do you believe that, since you think of yourself as a good human being, your choices are always in the best interest of yourself and everyone around you? Do you, as does Garofalo, believe that you can discard information that conflicts with what you believe to be true at this moment? Do you, as does Garofalo, believe that it is appropriate to dehumanize those who disagree with your viewpoints? That was a Nazi strategy.

Now imagine yourself looking at a “conservative” Republican and thinking how narrow-minded, how black-and-white, how bigoted his thinking would be if he discarded all information supporting your beliefs. My guess is that you are too afraid to examine your own beliefs and motives. Many people are.


It may be this single dysfunction that causes most of humanity’s problems.




MarkO just can’t avoid the name calling, can you? It's pathological.


I have heard and personally witnessed abuses of government redistribution programs:

My step-daughter told me the story of the woman who paid for groceries with food stamps and then got into a brand new SUV.

A friend of mine used to work with an office window overlooking the outside of the government building where they issued monthly welfare checks. He said that guys used to gather underneath a tree outside the building and smoke crack while their girlfriends were inside collecting welfare checks based on the amount of kids they had. They called the first of the month “Muthuh’s Day.”

I knew a guy who was getting government grants to attend University. His parents were well off and could afford to support him so he used the extra cash to party.


How do you stop these abuses? Well, a number of leftists think that throwing more money at the problem works. That way you increase the number of government workers who can then spend more time verifying that people are not abusing the system. So the percentage of money going to help people in need is actually becoming smaller as government agencies grow larger. It creates jobs for the people who provide buildings, computers, desks, chairs, paper, … to all those government workers.

That’s a hell of a job creation program. But is it giving us the intended consequences?
last edited: 4/23/09 11:09:55 AM”

“Do you, as does Garofalo, believe that it is appropriate to dehumanize those who disagree with your viewpoints? That was a Nazi strategy.

It's a Tilt strategy, too. He keeps such good intellectual company.”

“Those programs, for what its worth, subsidize low wages and take business "off the hook" for living wages.

Just to be devil's advocate:
If "living wages" were required then some of those government subsidies that send you into emotional fits could be eliminated, ArcO.�
MarkO
11:20:24 AM
4/23/09


OH DRUNKO...you are so Fu@king WRONG as usual. No in actuality the Government Free Money programs PUNISH recipients if they actually EARN money. (Trust me here dip $hit) In a study in 1989 it was determined a mother of 2 children on the full government ride (AFDC, SOC Security, Public Housing etc) would have to start...START at $10.00 to break barely even.

Then if she DID get a job (usually entry level) she gets hit so hard at funding loss its a losing game. Plus with the good legal system when she leaves home to work her house gets robbed and...oh well just a bad day.

GOD you are so full of the typical drunken liberal crap I love it.”

“I think it's 3rd party time.....”

“I have a serious, non-argumentative question for you, Strat. Did your taxes increase this year?

I've had to pay the government for the last four years (something well worth protest in my opinion), but this year I actually got money back. Rather than "unfair taxation," I'm actually seeing what appears to be more lenient taxation.
last edited: 4/28/09 2:39:43 PM”

“I have been saying 3rd party for years. It will never happen.”

“I'd prefer no parties. That's even less likely.”

“The best chance you had was destroyed when Buchannon moved in on Perot's Reform Party and spent their nest egg (for which the Republicans will be eternally grateful).

Then, as a direct result of allowing Perot into the Presidential debates of 1992, the running of the debates was taken away from the League of Women Voters and turned over to a commission run by Democrat and the Republican party hacks. You will never see a third party candidate in those debates again.”

“my taxes went up this year. i also wasn't allowed some deductions i got last year. i can't wait for next year.”

“I had to pay in Pepsi. I'm married withholding at zero and I still had to pay in at all levels. At least it's not as bad as when I was self contracted though. I was paying nearly 33% taxes then.”