Glenn Beck rally will be a measure of the tea party's strength

Jetboogieman said:

That's actually as hyperbole as saying all Republicans wanna see a theocratical Christian state...

I mean do you think Obama's master plan is to keep a brother down so they keep voting for him?

Click to expand...

Just saying, Republicans have supported the Civil rights Movement which Democrats wanted to continue with the Jim Crow Laws and other legislation that are based on ethnicity. Now it's the Democrats spouting off that they are for the minorities... The only things I've seen is the Democrats saying what minorities want to hear, "It's not your fault, here have a brownie point because of your ethnicity."

And Beck wanted to point out the symbolism of the Civil Rights Movement and how it lost it's meaning to being for human rights and etc. when it is supposed to be for equal rights of opportunity, not of wealth nor of rewards. And human rights is just overused. Anything can be taken as a human right nowadays. "I have a human right to own a house, so gimme a house!" It's not far from this right now, especially how the government made some Banks give sub-prime loans, which busted in the worst way possible.

One question, how does receiving welfare keep you downtrodden?

Your Star said:

One question, how does receiving welfare keep you downtrodden?

Click to expand...

well, by getting payments off the government, you lose the incentive to earn more than just enough to live on, however, if you're unable to pay rent, and are forced to live on the street, your chances of obtaining a job are obviously much higher.

I'm so concerned about this whole Tea party movement, really has us libs shaking in our boots.

The rally will be a measure of our societies gullibility.

Your Star said:

One question, how does receiving welfare keep you downtrodden?

Click to expand...

Normally it doesn't keep you downtrodden, but it does somewhat keep you dependent - especially to those who do not use welfare for it's intended purpose but use it more as a way of living. Welfare's intent was noble - temporarily help people when they are really down and need it so they can get back on their feet. Application and management however was lacking and still is. Fraud and abuse occur locally all the time. As you know, many abuse it and programs like welfare, food stamps, etc. not as a temporary fix but a long term lifestyle solution. However, welfare's stated purpose was / is narrow: Help someone for a short period of time until they get back on their feet. What would be better is not just giving money (and tracking that money) but putting these people to work where they can earn their pay. If not immediately, requiring job training and putting together programs that will enhance and allow not only menial / manual labor but higher paying jobs that provide opportunity to lift these people up economically. Just handing out money can pay the bills, it doesn't increase that person's job skills, doesn't increase their educational level, doesn't raise their abilities to find permanent work.

I guess my question to you is, how does accepting welfare life a person up and out of being downtrodden?

Ockham said:

Normally it doesn't keep you downtrodden, but it does somewhat keep you dependent - especially to those who do not use welfare for it's intended purpose but use it more as a way of living. Welfare's intent was noble - temporarily help people when they are really down and need it so they can get back on their feet. Application and management however was lacking and still is. Fraud and abuse occur locally all the time. As you know, many abuse it and programs like welfare, food stamps, etc. not as a temporary fix but a long term lifestyle solution. However, welfare's stated purpose was / is narrow: Help someone for a short period of time until they get back on their feet. What would be better is not just giving money (and tracking that money) but putting these people to work where they can earn their pay. If not immediately, requiring job training and putting together programs that will enhance and allow not only menial / manual labor but higher paying jobs that provide opportunity to lift these people up economically. Just handing out money can pay the bills, it doesn't increase that person's job skills, doesn't increase their educational level, doesn't raise their abilities to find permanent work.

I guess my question to you is, how does accepting welfare life a person up and out of being downtrodden?

Click to expand...

I think welfare needs to be reformed to better help people get work, and become self-sufficient. I would love for welfare to come with schooling, or work programs. Though the system we have now, is better than no system at all. Also not everyone on welfare is uneducated, or not willing to work, especially in these times, it may just be that they got laid off, and can't find more work. Not due to lack of effort, but lack of available jobs.

Welfare doesn't keep one downtrodden, but it doesn't necessarily give someone a step up either. It just gives them the opportunity to not be homeless, and keep food on their table, for themselves, and their family, while they search for work. A search which is entirely up to them, and dependent on their skills.

Catz Part Deux said:

I'm going to laugh my ass off about this thread in November.

Click to expand...

Bookmarked.

So are you prepared to retract your claim that "most of the tea party candidates lost in the primaries. "?

Your Star said:

I think welfare needs to be reformed to better help people get work, and become self-sufficient. I would love for welfare to come with schooling, or work programs. Though the system we have now, is better than no system at all. Also not everyone on welfare is uneducated, or not willing to work, especially in these times, it may just be that they got laid off, and can't find more work. Not due to lack of effort, but lack of available jobs.

Welfare doesn't keep one downtrodden, but it doesn't necessarily give someone a step up either. It just gives them the opportunity to not be homeless, and keep food on their table, for themselves, and their family, while they search for work. A search which is entirely up to them, and dependent on their skills.

Click to expand...

And that's the problem - welfare is doesn't provide anything but a chance to not be homeless... that's dependency. Keep getting a hand out to not be homeless... but no more. Welfare has existed since the 1930's and there's been ample opportunity for all involved to reform welfare over the past 80 years, yet it hasn't happened. If Democrats who claim to be for the working man and little guy actually wanted to lift people from being downtrodden - wouldn't they have reformed welfare so it is not a handout? The economics of Welfare are huge.

Welfare Spending Chart in United States 1980-2015 - Federal State Local

Change the chart to show 1980-2015. Welfare spending has a severe bend upwards into higher spending - $400+ Billion. Workfare was a Reagan program meant to show how to increase skills and self esteem with those who normally would receive welfare money only. That died as a solution, but was brought up by a Republican. So back to my point - it's not in Democrats best political interest to lift people out of their downtrodden ways. It's in their interest to keep people dependent and angry about Republicans, so Democrats can continue to get their votes.

Ockham said:

And that's the problem - welfare is doesn't provide anything but a chance to not be homeless... that's dependency. Keep getting a hand out to not be homeless... but no more. Welfare has existed since the 1930's and there's been ample opportunity for all involved to reform welfare over the past 80 years, yet it hasn't happened. If Democrats who claim to be for the working man and little guy actually wanted to lift people from being downtrodden - wouldn't they have reformed welfare so it is not a handout? The economics of Welfare are huge.

Welfare Spending Chart in United States 1980-2015 - Federal State Local

Change the chart to show 1980-2015. Welfare spending has a severe bend upwards into higher spending - $400+ Billion. Workfare was a Reagan program meant to show how to increase skills and self esteem with those who normally would receive welfare money only. That died as a solution, but was brought up by a Republican. So back to my point - it's not in Democrats best political interest to lift people out of their downtrodden ways. It's in their interest to keep people dependent and angry about Republicans, so Democrats can continue to get their votes.

Click to expand...

Suggesting that liberals support welfare to just get votes is ... offensive and shows a gross misunderstanding of our principals. While, I think there are wackos of the Al Sharpton variety who have such a victim mentality that they are shooting themselves in the foot for not supporting stuff that helps people be more self sufficient and satisfied with their life, to assume it is mainstream or even deliberate shows a sever lack of understanding or curiosity about other beliefs.

megaprogman said:

Suggesting that liberals support welfare to just get votes is ... offensive and shows a gross misunderstanding of our principals. While, I think there are wackos of the Al Sharpton variety who have such a victim mentality that they are shooting themselves in the foot for not supporting stuff that helps people be more self sufficient and satisfied with their life, to assume it is mainstream or even deliberate shows a sever lack of understanding or curiosity about other beliefs.

Click to expand...

Sorry you're offended, but I'm sutre if you looked into the last 80 years of welfare and social programs and could push away the partisan nonsense - you'll see that the social programs are meant to keep people dependent, not improve their financial situation. You want to make a distinction between some and others - I'm identifying policy not individuals. Sharpton doesn't sign laws, pass laws and programs or lobby for them. I'm simply asking if the DNC policy and rhetoric is true, why have little to no changes in Welfare (as one example only) not changed and why was it that a Republican (Reagan) was the only one in the past 30 years that has tried to reform it?

EnigmaO01 said:

So Fox news and Glen Wreck are once again proving they have an agenda and reporting news is secondary. No surprise there I guess.

If I was black I would take offense by this political stunt.

Click to expand...

Oh that's a funny one. You are funny. Did you see that on Daily KOS or Democratic Underground? Anyway, I don't think you really know how you'd feel, if you were black. So you don't think any blacks will be at the event in support of it?

Ockham said:

Sorry you're offended, but I'm sutre if you looked into the last 80 years of welfare and social programs and could push away the partisan nonsense - you'll see that the social programs are meant to keep people dependent, not improve their financial situation.

Click to expand...

The sense ruling most of the time in the early welfare years was that people would work on their own to improve their situation if given a chance. I believe that idea has been shown to be naive. So I agree that some force must be applied, lest people become complacant.

Ockham said:

You want to make a distinction between some and others - I'm identifying policy not individuals. Sharpton doesn't sign laws, pass laws and programs or lobby for them. I'm simply asking if the DNC policy and rhetoric is true, why have little to no changes in Welfare (as one example only) not changed and why was it that a Republican (Reagan) was the only one in the past 30 years that has tried to reform it?

Click to expand...

Ultimately, you have to make a distinction, just as I don't believe that any ideological group is monolithic, neither are liberals. Would you like it if I thought every conservative was on the level of Erod or American? Going back to the naive believe, I think it is still somewhat there among some of the groups of liberals, who think they are either owed something or that people are inherently rational and will do good things for themselves without some outside force acting on them. I don't think either is true, but the myth is still there.

Where you see malice, I see idealism.

Ockham said:

And that's the problem - welfare is doesn't provide anything but a chance to not be homeless... that's dependency. Keep getting a hand out to not be homeless... but no more. Welfare has existed since the 1930's and there's been ample opportunity for all involved to reform welfare over the past 80 years, yet it hasn't happened. If Democrats who claim to be for the working man and little guy actually wanted to lift people from being downtrodden - wouldn't they have reformed welfare so it is not a handout? The economics of Welfare are huge.

Welfare Spending Chart in United States 1980-2015 - Federal State Local

Change the chart to show 1980-2015. Welfare spending has a severe bend upwards into higher spending - $400+ Billion. Workfare was a Reagan program meant to show how to increase skills and self esteem with those who normally would receive welfare money only. That died as a solution, but was brought up by a Republican. So back to my point - it's not in Democrats best political interest to lift people out of their downtrodden ways. It's in their interest to keep people dependent and angry about Republicans, so Democrats can continue to get their votes.

Click to expand...

It's not really dependency, but a saving grace.
Does that chart count for inflation, and cost of living increases? It's reasonable for welfare spending to increase when cost of living increases.
I would love something like workfare to be implemented. An education, and work program would help people tremendously, it would help more people to become self-sufficient, and live a life of comfort, instead of survival. Education or experience are the most important factors in finding good, and stable jobs, but if one doesn't have either, it's going to be hard to find work. Having education, and work programs for people on welfare will give those people both of those, and increase their chances of finding jobs so that they can leave the welfare program.

And for your theory, your assuming that people vote Democrat solely on the welfare program. I'm on food stamps, but I became a democrat long before we've had food stamps.
Also to say that they support welfare to get votes is just absurd. I think they support welfare so that people, don't have to be homeless, or starve to death. Especially children, why should children have to pay for their parents mistakes?
I could say that the Republicans want the poor children to starve because they want to cut welfare programs, but that would be the same type of hyperbole as you're suggesting.

I just love this. On one hand you have the people that actually believe that Palin and Beck have answers and are doing something Positive for America. On the other hand you have the folks that feel those 2 dont have the answers and we should vote against both for liberals.
And here I am looking at BOTH sides and depressed because America is going down the tubes. There is no 3rd Party. (Tea Party is Republican and dont let anyone tell you anything different)

What the repubs did was genius. They make it LOOK like people are making a change with the Tea Party but all they are doing is putting in another republican. :slapme:

Your Star said:

Watch Beck come out as a liberal :2razz:

Click to expand...

What and blow his cash cow suckering all these so called conservatives? Not a chance. The guy is making too much money and laughing all the way to the bank. So is FOX.

American said:

Oh that's a funny one. You are funny.

Click to expand...

Thank you!

American said:

Did you see that on Daily KOS or Democratic Underground?

Click to expand...

Never read them. In fact, I've vaguely heard of Daily KOS mentioned, and never heard of the other one. How do you know so much about them?

American said:

Anyway, I don't think you really know how you'd feel, if you were black.

Click to expand...

I'll get back to you after I confer with my black relatives, but I already know how they feel about Glenn Beck, so it's not a stretch they willl be offended by what Mr. Whitebread is doing.

American said:

So you don't think any blacks will be at the event in support of it?

Click to expand...

About as many as there are in the teaparty.

The Giant Noodle said:

There is no 3rd Party. (Tea Party is Republican and dont let anyone tell you anything different)

What the repubs did was genius. They make it LOOK like people are making a change with the Tea Party but all they are doing is putting in another republican. :slapme:

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right! Don't forget they also hate Obama with all their might.

Catz Part Deux said:

Who won, exactly? Did ANYONE that Sarah Palin supported win this week?

Click to expand...

Umm, yeah. Of the candidates she stumped for, I think the last count was 16-10, Sarah's favor. You do know that the senate run off in Alaska has all but been won by Sarah's endorsed candidate, too?

So yeah, you can try to paint Palin as a liability, but numbers don't lie, chick.

Catz Part Deux said:

I'm going to laugh my ass off about this thread in November.

Click to expand...

How does that address the fact that you were flat out wrong in what you stated?

Your Star said:

It's not really dependency, but a saving grace.

Click to expand...

You say tomato, I say tomahto.

Your Star said:

Does that chart count for inflation, and cost of living increases? It's reasonable for welfare spending to increase when cost of living increases.

Click to expand...

Only if inflation has increased 320% since 1980, and it has not, it's increased approximately 164% since 1980. What is the attribute then for the remaining 156%?

Your Star said:

I would love something like workfare to be implemented. An education, and work program would help people tremendously, it would help more people to become self-sufficient, and live a life of comfort, instead of survival. Education or experience are the most important factors in finding good, and stable jobs, but if one doesn't have either, it's going to be hard to find work. Having education, and work programs for people on welfare will give those people both of those, and increase their chances of finding jobs so that they can leave the welfare program.

Click to expand...

Totally agree.

Your Star said:

And for your theory, your assuming that people vote Democrat solely on the welfare program. I'm on food stamps, but I became a democrat long before we've had food stamps. Also to say that they support welfare to get votes is just absurd. I think they support welfare so that people, don't have to be homeless, or starve to death.

Click to expand...

First, I'll say not all vote Democrate soley because they are social program dependent - but I would say some do, just as some abuse the system and fraud is rampant. Democrats policies however do extend a bribe to those just hanging on to - just hang on longer. And when voting time comes along, vote for the guy or gal who will continue to allow you to hang on. If you had to choose between a Democrat who supports the extension (as is) of Food Stamps versus a Democrat who advocates the removal of the Food Stamp program, which would you (who use food stamps) vote for? Second, you set up a false choice in that without welfare people will starve and or become homeless. That's not necessarily true. If welfare was replaced, or phased out people would have to take care of each other or the welfare participants would be highly motivated to sign on to new programs created to increase their job skills instead of being paid to just stay on the cusp of homelessness. Some people actually have family as well, or could rely on Church or charity. Granted, those organization don't spend $400 billion dollars a year on Federal Welfare ... that's a lot of welfare. Third, not every Democrat is in your unique situation, so the implication that most people are like you is not true, therefore the implication is misleading.

Your Star said:

Especially children, why should children have to pay for their parents mistakes? I could say that the Republicans want the poor children to starve because they want to cut welfare programs, but that would be the same type of hyperbole as you're suggesting.

Click to expand...

Children always pay for parents mistakes and no amount of social programs will change that. How are children who's parents use welfare money to create more children, or who use that money for drugs or alcohol avoid making their children suffer? They do not.

You have not addressed 30 years worth of dependence other than saying it IS dependence ... just enough to keep them from being homeless. THAT is the epitome of dependence. That is what Democrats want to keep going and that is what they've co-opted groups like the Black Caucus, NAACP and former Civil Rights leaders into buying into politically. That keeps these groups in power, that keeps Democrats in power through votes. In 25 years as an adult - all one has to do is look around and see this happening year after year. I just don't get why intelligent and moral Democrats ignore it - maybe they don't and that's why they become Independents. :shrug:

Mellie said:

The tea party's strength? ??? This isn't a tea party.

Click to expand...

Bang,...Bang,,,,Bang....ouch!

Is that brick wall hurting your head as much as it is mine Mellie?

One more time
THIS IS NOT A TEA PARTY!
THIS IS NOT ABOUT MLK though MLK's niece will speak.
This is not a PROTEST.
Sarah Palin will be there because her son is in the Military.
This is a non political event and will benefit the children of fallen soldiers.
EWWWW that awful evil Glenn Beck! How dare he!!!

Barbbtx said:

Bang,...Bang,,,,Bang....ouch!

Is that brick wall hurting your head as much as it is mine Mellie?

One more time
THIS IS NOT A TEA PARTY!
THIS IS NOT ABOUT MLK though MLK's niece will speak.
This is not a PROTEST.
Sarah Palin will be there because her son is in the Military.
This is a non political event and will benefit the children of fallen soldiers.
EWWWW that awful evil Glenn Beck! How dare he!!!

Click to expand...

You seem to have more faith in Beck than most people. We will see if he can truly avoid attacking those whom he disagrees with.

texmaster said:

Can't you research it for yourself?

Won:

Pat Toomey
Rand Paul
Mike Lee
Raul Labrador
Nikki Haley
Tom Graves
Tim Crawford
Scott Brown
Mo Brooks
Sharron Angle

Lost:

Chuck DeVore
Doug Hoffman
Pat Hughes
Don Lowery
Marlin Stutzman
John Hostettler
Bob Vander Plaats

And Joe Miller is about to win in Alaska.

Kind of goes against your claim that "most" lost doesn't it? Are you prepared to retract your claim?

Chart: How Have the 2010 Tea Party Candidates Fared? « The Washington Independent

Click to expand...

Would you agree this is a beter measure of success and failure than the rally?

The Giant Noodle said:

What the repubs did was genius. They make it LOOK like people are making a change with the Tea Party but all they are doing is putting in another republican. :slapme:

Click to expand...

Rand Paul ?
and hopefully Conservatives instead of Republicans who lost their way. The tea party is not thrilled with either party. Taking over the Republican Party is the best way to get the country moving in the right direction. Yes, pretty genius of the frustrated American people.