Or perhaps we could just reject the utter, mindless dogmatism responsible for people conforming to an ideology so thoroughly that their very identity is wrapped up in it?
I don't care whether it is "socialist", "Libertarian", "conservative" "tea partier" or "anarcho-syndicalist", if what rolls off people's tongues (or fingers in the case of the medium we are using here) amounts to nothing but the recitation of hackneyed, conformist talking points, then why bother?
"you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos
I see about everything except the basis of the study; the questions asked, the respondents demographics, cross tabs, etc etc. You know the things that show whether the study had merit or not. There is NO empirical evidence available to examine the findings. Big red flag there.
What's good about the "tea party" movement? Its concern on ever-growing, ever-encroaching federal power.
From a source not biased to the Tea Party.
If you remember, the Tea Parties were originally formed to protest the bailouts. They were so mad at the Wall Street bankers who destroyed the economy and then took our hard earned money for their efforts.
Are you saying that you disagree with them there?
Where Are the Tea Party Protests About Wall Street? | Disinformation
P.S. the reason they didn't demand the Dodd/Frank reform bill and support it is because it makes bailouts accepted practice.
Last edited by 1Perry; 08-22-11 at 08:09 AM.
Cenk Uygur: Where Are the Tea Party Protests About Wall Street?
That's what the tea party claimed they were formed for.
From your source.
Like Uygur wrote, if indeed the tea baggers were formed on the basis of protest and anger against wallstreet bailouts, in particular that of the million dollar bonuses those wallstreet fat cats received, why was there not even a single protest organized by the tea baggers and their funders on wallstreet?If you remember, the Tea Parties were originally formed to protest the bailouts. They were so mad at the Wall Street bankers who destroyed the economy and then took our hard earned money for their efforts.
So, they will take this opportunity, of course, to launch their own protest of Wall Street. They will protest the TARP money, the easy credit, the lack of regulation, the wild risk taking and the excessive bonuses paid with taxpayer money. They're really going to take the fight to them.
Just kidding. They're not going to do anything. They're going to sit out this fight on financial reform and put absolutely no pressure on Wall Street at all. Because they are tools easily manipulated by right-wing organizations funded by corporate America.
Why instead did we see those protests against Obama and democrats when they were voting on wallstreet reform and re-regulation of?
Last edited by jfuh; 08-22-11 at 09:46 PM.
You cannot reasonably say we would be talking about any spending cuts without the political pressure the Tea Party influence on the 2010 misterms and the people they helped elect. Every sort of reduction in spending I see is down the road such and such years. The tea party position is to find waste and cut spending now, rather than later. It hasnt been part of the conversation in years. Its a good thing. More government should not always be the answer.
Jfuh, a better question would be how much growth of the federal government led to the creation of the tea party, not the other way around.