Boston Tea Parties springing up all over country Mainstream Media ignores

[GarfieldJL]

See:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...-ignored-media

Newsbusters has sourcing to back up what they put in the article primarily local sources (through the blogs), the bulk of the media is choosing to ignore it.

[SkinWalker]

It looks like a bunch of hate-mongering, fear-mongering sacral-chapeaus with an agenda of ignorance to me. I see no evidence that there is anything that legitimate media should cover. The ideologue, fringe, and right-wing extremist blogs seem to have the market cornered.

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

It looks like a bunch of hate-mongering, fear-mongering asshats with an agenda of ignorance to me. I see no evidence that there is anything that legitimate media should cover. The ideologue, fringe, and right-wing extremist blogs seem to have the market cornered.

Complaining about the fact we're getting a tax hike when Obama's Treasury Secretary is a tax cheat isn't hate-mongering and you know it.

[SkinWalker]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

Complaining about the fact we're getting a tax hike when Obama's Treasury Secretary is a tax cheat isn't hate-mongering and you know it.

Its hate-mongering and fear-mongering.

[EnderWiggin]

Ehh, so what? Even if the MSM reported on it, it wouldn't make any difference. Nothing worthwhile anyway.

_EW_

[SkinWalker]

It smacks of a pseudo-tea party to me. Websites emerging simultaneously with the same hate-filled messages, regurgitating the fear-mongering idiocy of sacral-chapeaus like known drug addict Rush Limbaugh, etc. All the signs look the same, etc. Nuts like Limbaugh and others are good at appealing to their sheep, who are generally members of the wealthy class who are generally unaffected by joblessness and actually part of the problem which created the economic crises we're dealing with today.

I posit that the people who show up at these rallies which fallaciously refer to themselves as "tea parties" are actually members of the wealthy class and are registered conservatives who allow themselves to fall into the rhetoric of talking heads like Limbaugh (and others on hate-radio and hate-blogs). Their cult leaders want President Obama to fail at all costs. This is treasonous in my opinion, certainly unpatriotic -and they hide their hatred and fear mongering by draping themselves in the flag and fallaciously applying appeals to patriotism (like using terms like "tea party"). They want President Obama to fail even at the cost of ruining the nation and driving the United States into a dark age.

If my assertion of their class and purpose is correct, then anyone who follows the series of links starting with the OP's to the original photos will be hard-pressed to see anything but clean-cut white people all holding signs that look like they were created by the same makers.

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

It smacks of a pseudo-tea party to me. Websites emerging simultaneously with the same hate-filled messages, regurgitating the fear-mongering idiocy of asshats like known drug addict Rush Limbaugh, etc. All the signs look the same, etc. Nuts like Limbaugh and others are good at appealing to their sheep, who are generally members of the wealthy class who are generally unaffected by joblessness and actually part of the problem which created the economic crises we're dealing with today.

No, it's called they thing the stimulus package was highway robbery, considering nobody read it.

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

I posit that the people who show up at these rallies which fallaciously refer to themselves as "tea parties" are actually members of the wealthy class and are registered conservatives who allow themselves to fall into the rhetoric of talking heads like Limbaugh (and others on hate-radio and hate-blogs). Their cult leaders want President Obama to fail at all costs. This is treasonous in my opinion, certainly unpatriotic -and they hide their hatred and fear mongering by draping themselves in the flag and fallaciously applying appeals to patriotism (like using terms like "tea party"). They want President Obama to fail even at the cost of ruining the nation and driving the United States into a dark age.

No, they want Obama's far-left fringe policies to fail before Obama completely bankrupts the United States. You're deliberately taking Rush Limbaugh out of context.

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

If my assertion of their class and purpose is correct, then anyone who follows the series of links starting with the OP's to the original photos will be hard-pressed to see anything but clean-cut white people all holding signs that look like they were created by the same makers.

Define Rich...

[EnderWiggin]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

You're deliberately taking Rush Limbaugh out of context.

Originally Posted by Rush

I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.

Seems like good enough context for me

_EW_

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by EnderWiggin

Seems like good enough context for me

If you went further up in the commentary, you'd see he was talking about Obama's socialist agenda that flies in the face of everything this country stands for. If that is the kind of policies that Obama wants to put forth, then Rush hopes he fails, because Rush believes that it would completely wreck the country turning a Recession into a rather long depression.

Originally Posted by PastramiX

Alright, did you even read it?

Not in its entirety, no, but then I didn't have a vote on the stimulus either, I know about quite a few of the items that shouldn't be in there.

Originally Posted by PastramiX

Not really. Just because he "apologized" doesn't mean that he really meant it.

He didn't apologize, because it was the media trying to silence one of the people that have the ability to voice criticism of the "anointed one."

Originally Posted by PastramiX

Yeah, but he's right, and it's not that hard to deny it.

The fact the overwhelming majority of people in Ohio happen to be white doesn't make them Racists, try looking at the state's demographics.

[PastramiX]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

If you went further up in the commentary, you'd see he was talking about Obama's socialist agenda that flies in the face of everything this country stands for. If that is the kind of policies that Obama wants to put forth, then Rush hopes he fails, because Rush believes that it would completely wreck the country turning a Recession into a rather long depression.

And how do you know what's right for the country?

Not in its entirety, no, but then I didn't have a vote on the stimulus either, I know about quite a few of the items that shouldn't be in there.

I don't think you're clairvoyant, so I don't understand how you know "what's right" for the economy, and "what's not right". Apparently un-American, liberal practices shouldn't be in there, right?

He didn't apologize, because it was the media trying to silence one of the people that have the ability to voice criticism of the "anointed one."

He's been blaming the media for everything. When the truth doesn't satisfy him, he just blurts "LIBERAL MEDIA!", bringing up a whole storm about how "they" are un-American. Seldom does he actually like to address the points, and continues with more name-calling.

The fact the overwhelming majority of people in Ohio happen to be white doesn't make them Racists, try looking at the state's demographics.

It's not about the people of Ohio, just those at his rally, who seem to be mainly conservative aristocrats.

[SkinWalker]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

The fact the overwhelming majority of people in Ohio happen to be white doesn't make them Racists, try looking at the state's demographics.

Even if we accept that many of the "protesters" (a.k.a. the hate-mongers & fear-mongers) are from out of town, we would still expect to see a representation of ethnic minorities in a crowd that large.

Demographics of Cincinnati
Demographics of Ohio

If there were a valid representation of the Ohio population, between 12 and 42 percent of the people in the photos should be black. I didn't see a single one.

This thread appears to be a continuation of the sentiment of hate-mongering and fear-mongering either intentionally as a proponent or unwittingly as a gullible victim.

[EnderWiggin]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

If you went further up in the commentary, you'd see he was talking about Obama's socialist agenda that flies in the face of everything this country stands for. If that is the kind of policies that Obama wants to put forth, then Rush hopes he fails, because Rush believes that it would completely wreck the country turning a Recession into a rather long depression.

Here you go:

Originally Posted by Letter to Rush

"If you could send us 400 words on your hope for the Obama presidency, we need it by Monday night, that would be ideal."

Originally Posted by Rush

"I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails."

Yes, later he said he was referring to liberalism in general, but there are the man's words, and that is all the context you need.

_EW_

[SkinWalker]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

No, it's called they thing the stimulus package was highway robbery, considering nobody read it.

It's called unpatriotic hate-mongering and fear-mongering. The sacral-chapeaus that organized these events should be ashamed of themselves, but they're not American first. They're ideologues first and conservatives second. That they're born in the United States is their only claim to being American and their use of the term "tea party" should be offensive to anyone who considers themselves American.

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

Okay you've gone into class warfare and racism SkinWalker.

Really? How many Asians, blacks, Hispanics, etc. can you find in the photos? This is like Where's Waldo! Except the African American Waldo will stand out!

If there is no relevant correlation between class and ethnicity, then we'll expect to see 42% of the people at the rally to be black -that's the percentage of the Cincinnati population that is African American. I bet you can't find one.

[PastramiX]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

No, it's called they thing the stimulus package was highway robbery, considering nobody read it.

Alright, did you even read it?

No, they want Obama's far-left fringe policies to fail before Obama completely bankrupts the United States. You're deliberately taking Rush Limbaugh out of context.

Not really. Just because he "apologized" doesn't mean that he really meant it.

Okay you've gone into class warfare and racism SkinWalker.

Yeah, but he's right, and it's not that hard to deny it.

[SkinWalker]

Clearly this is how Limbaugh (and many others) feel. They have a set of conclusions to which they seek only that confirmation which supports these conclusions.

That Limbaugh retracted his statement later only demonstrates that he realized just how unpatriotic it looked. But, make no mistake, hate-mongers like Limbaugh want the President to fail.

[SkinWalker]

The number of attendees in Philadelphia was a <gasp > whopping 50! In Boise, ID? 4!

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

The number of attendees in Philadelphia was a <gasp > whopping 50! In Boise, ID? 4!

I don't think your source knows how to count...

[SkinWalker]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

I don't think your source knows how to count...

Perhaps not. They are, after all, conservative bloggers. Cognitive function and all....

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2009...party-protest/

Oh, and one legitimate news source (as opposed to the hate-mongering blogs you cited).

http://www.idahostatesman.com/boise/story/682547.html

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

Perhaps not. They are, after all, conservative bloggers. Cognitive function and all....

I thought your source was referring to the thing in Ohio, and as far as cognitive functions are concerned, Liberals aren't any smarter than Conservatives.

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

Oh, and one legitimate news source (as opposed to the hate-mongering blogs you cited).

Quit using the DNC's talking points, calling anyone that disagrees with you a hate-monger. Seriously, there is a difference between protesting policy and hate-mongering...

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

http://www.idahostatesman.com/boise/story/682547.html

Do you know how cold it gets in Idaho, Montana, Colorado etc.?

[SkinWalker]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

Quit using the DNC's talking points, calling anyone that disagrees with you a hate-monger.

I arrived at that term on my own. Nor do I watch or read the news to pick up on it elsewhere. I only had to read the links you provided and the hate-mongering and fear-mongering are obvious. Its no wonder others use it.

Do you know how cold it gets in Idaho, Montana, Colorado etc.?

Yes. It was 41 degrees Fahrenheit on February 27, 2009 in Boise, ID according to the National Weather Service. Unusually warm. Previous records were set in 1992 at 49 degrees. Perhaps it was such a nice day, no one wanted to waste it on a protest?

It is hilarious, however, that first you start with the assumption that they can't count, now your making excuses that they're too afraid of the cold.... You're nothing if not consistent Garf. Rather than admit any failing or <gasp > being wrong, you'll find an excuse instead.

[ET Warrior]

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL

Do you know how cold it gets in Idaho, Montana, Colorado etc.?

I actually live in Colorado. Right by the mountains. Just because winter seems awfully frigid to you does not mean it does to us. We're pretty used to it. Unless the temp drops below 0 degrees Fahrenheit most Coloradans have no issue being outside. (We have coats!)

Edit -

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

It was 41 degrees Fahrenheit on February 27, 2009 in Boise, ID according to the National Weather Service.

That's warm enough for short sleeves and maybe a light jacket (if it's windy)

[mimartin]

Originally Posted by SkinWalker

In Boise, ID? 4!

Wow. Damn liberal media with that kind of turnout they should have at least sent Al Roker to cover it.

[mur'phon]

No, they want Obama's far-left fringe policies to fail before Obama completely bankrupts the United States.

Define bankrupt, the US allready got a debt the size of Putin's ego.

If you went further up in the commentary, you'd see he was talking about Obama's socialist agenda that flies in the face of everything this country stands for.

The US stands for whatever the citizens of the US want it to stand for, and as far as I know so far all of Obamas "socialist" policy was part of what he was elected on. So could you please point out "socialist" policy he didn't advertise? Because if you can't I find it hard to say that "this flies in the face og everything the US stands for".

It's because uncontrolled spending and raising taxes in a recession cause worse problems.

While I'm not much of a Keynesian, I won't argue against the wisdom of using public spending to increase demand if the recession apears to be long, so while I would usually agree with you, the severity of this crisis calls for increased public spending, despite the bad taste it leaves.

Because the tax and spend mentality has been tried and each time it has failed miserably.

Really? Mind showing me the failures?

[mur'phon]

He actually didn't advertise any of his real views (he tried to hide them), he just promised change,

Really? I listened to his speeches, read the statements from his campaign, and so far he hasn't (to my knowledge) done anything more "socialist" than what he said he would. If people choose not to educate themselves on his plans and views and still voted for him, that was their decision, and, if they don't like theese policies, they'll be able to scrap him at the next election.

Obama was a socialist

Can we operationally define this word for the purpose of this thread? Right now it sounds like it could mean anything from liberal to communist.

Isn't this the same wikipedia that got in trouble for trying to cover up Obama's negatives.

Please read about Keynesian economics, I don't care which source you use, but the wiki article is, essentially, correct (this is from someone with little love for his ideas).

That's why you cut government wasteful spending at the same time, not spend more on pork.

I don't see the point of replying to this before you at least get a basic understanding of keynesian economics, but to give a short answer, spending is spending, wastefull or not it generates demand, and while there are ways to spend that are better than others, you don't want to cut spending in a recession.

[Tyrion]

Originally Posted by Article

For instance, with the exception of Fox News and CNN, no major television outlet has covered even one of these events except the original proposed by Santelli on February 19.

Fwah? So the entire mainstream media shamelessly ignores these events, as long as you exclude the two most mainstream channels, CNN and Fox News?

[mur'phon]

Keynes proposed the theory of deficit spending to get out of a depression. Those principles were put into effect by FDR, and they worked, although WWII pretty much sealed the deal.

While I think his efforts before WW2 was so so, and not a terribly good advertisement for Keynes theories, WW2 in itself is a wonderfull (though unfourtantely one of few) examples of Keynesian policies put to work.

Pfft, same thing.

Only in America

Do you know how cold it gets in Idaho, Montana, Colorado etc.?

Yes, not terribly cold, if that's enough to keep yanks indoors, it seems it doesen't matter that much to people in those areas.

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by mur'phon

While I think his efforts before WW2 was so so, and not a terribly good advertisement for Keynes theories, WW2 in itself is a wonderfull (though unfourtantely one of few) examples of Keynesian policies put to work.

More of the only reason we got out of the Depression was World War II.

Originally Posted by mur'phon

Yes, not terribly cold, if that's enough to keep yanks indoors, it seems it doesen't matter that much to people in those areas.

Have you ever been to those states in the summer, it gets to be cold sometimes in the Summer, now imagine in the winter what those states are like. Furthermore Idaho doesn't exactly have much in the way of population density.

[mur'phon]

More of the only reason we got out of the Depression was World War II.

Which is incidentally an example of Keynesian theories in practice. The extreme spending by the state to support the war effort increased demand by a lot, which made unemployment go away.

Have you ever been to those states in the summer, it gets to be cold sometimes in the Summer, now imagine in the winter what those states are like.

No, however, this is where I live, and we haven't had much problems protesting in winter.

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by mur'phon

Which is incidentally an example of Keynesian theories in practice. The extreme spending by the state to support the war effort increased demand by a lot, which made unemployment go away.

Which is not what Obama is doing, he's calling for Government spending that is on nothing but Pork Projects, and is cutting funding to the military.

Originally Posted by mur'phon

No, however, this is where I live, and we haven't had much problems protesting in winter.

Okay, however the thing is Conservatives usually aren't the ones out protesting normally we see move.org or ACORN organizing protests on the Left.

[mur'phon]

Which is not what Obama is doing, he's calling for Government spending that is on nothing but Pork Projects, and is cutting funding to the military.

Demand is demand, while I dislike pork projects, last time I checked the stimulus bill contained less than 5% earmarks (that nice, prime, pork hiding place). Regardless, I would like you to please do me the favor of reading about Keynesian economics, as it would make the discussion far smoother.

Okay, however the thing is Conservatives usually aren't the ones out protesting normally we see move.org or ACORN organizing protests on the Left.

And? it is not as if protesting is rocket science, get the word out, gather people with a purpose, make a mess.

[mur'phon]

Maybe you want to give all your money to someone who doesn't pay taxes,

Nope, then again, no onedoes that unwillingly, I am however perfectly fine with paying part of my wage to such persons in order to keep the small store they buy food from in business. Money doesen't disapear, the money spent on wellfare will be spent by those recieving it on buying food, shelter etc which again employs people, this is why increased spending on wellfare during recessions is paradoxally enough good for saving jobs.

Anyway, if I am to reply to your posts concerning Keynesian economics (i.e any which talks about spending), I would like you to confirm that you have read about Keynesian economics

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by mur'phon

Nope, then again, no onedoes that unwillingly, I am however perfectly fine with paying part of my wage to such persons in order to keep the small store they buy food from in business. Money doesen't disapear, the money spent on wellfare will be spent by those recieving it on buying food, shelter etc which again employs people, this is why increased spending on wellfare during recessions is paradoxally enough good for saving jobs.

But it isn't even being spent on stuff like that, nor is it being used for job training. Not sure did the birth control measure get thrown out of the stimulus bill in the end or not? That was one of the items I can think of off the top of my head.

Originally Posted by mur'phon

Anyway, if I am to reply to your posts concerning Keynesian economics (i.e any which talks about spending), I would like you to confirm that you have read about Keynesian economics

I know some of the basics of Keynesian Economics, but I'm looking at things from a historical standpoint, if as you say Keynesian Economics was pre-World War II, we didn't get out of the Great Depression until we finally were in the war, because we were just digging a hole deeper and deeper hoping to get out of said hole.

[mur'phon]

But it isn't even being spent on stuff like that, nor is it being used for job training.

Money spent is money spent, while I'd prefer it being used for things like (sensible) infrastructure, even a bridge to nowhere provides work for those building the bridge, as well as to those making the concrete and other materials, keeping them of wellfare. I don't support such spending, however, it isn't as disastrous as it is during good times.

I know some of the basics of Keynesian Economics, but I'm looking at things from a historical standpoint, if as you say Keynesian Economics was pre-World War II, we didn't get out of the Great Depression until we finally were in the war, because we were just digging a hole deeper and deeper hoping to get out of said hole.

No, the principles of Keynesian economics have been tested from the dawn of civilization till today. Unless you can argue that WW2 "solved" for some other reason than that demand surged, I don't see your point. WW2 was in many ways essentially a continuation of the policies of before, increase public spending while racking up a debt in order to increase demand in the economy. I will however agree that a lot of the policies leading up to WW2 was terrible/terribly executed.

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by mur'phon

Money spent is money spent, while I'd prefer it being used for things like (sensible) infrastructure, even a bridge to nowhere provides work for those building the bridge, as well as to those making the concrete and other materials, keeping them of wellfare. I don't support such spending, however, it isn't as disastrous as it is during good times.

I fail to see why a bailout is needed for birth control... I also don't see why there needed to be a couple million dollars set aside for a rodent.

Originally Posted by mur'phon

No, the principles of Keynesian economics have been tested from the dawn of civilization till today. Unless you can argue that WW2 "solved" for some other reason than that demand surged, I don't see your point. WW2 was in many ways essentially a continuation of the policies of before, increase public spending while racking up a debt in order to increase demand in the economy. I will however agree that a lot of the policies leading up to WW2 was terrible/terribly executed.

Well the Democrats are pretty much just spending money to spend money, and that is stupid. If it was to improve infrastructure, refit aging combat aircraft etc. I would be okay with that, because it needs to be done, but the bulk of the money is going to people's pet projects.

[mur'phon]

I fail to see why a bailout is needed for birth control... I also don't see why there needed to be a couple million dollars set aside for a rodent.

It's money spent, in theese cases, it'll mean more work for those working with birth control/conservation, as well as any business involved in whatever those people consume.

Well the Democrats are pretty much just spending money to spend money, and that is stupid.

Most of the time, I'd agree with you, however a prolonged recession is the one time where I disagree.

If it was to improve infrastructure, refit aging combat aircraft etc. I would be okay with that, because it needs to be done, but the bulk of the money is going to people's pet projects.

Please show me that this is the case, regardless, money spent (without an equal tax increase) increases demand, and while I would hope most of it is spent decently, any increase in demand at the moment is most velcome.

[PastramiX]

Hey guys, I hope I see y'all on the 15th. I'm eager to curb stomp some liberal lawmakers and their socialist policies. In case you don't know where your local tea party is being held at, check out the link below.


http://taxdayteaparty.com/

[Rake]

I can't get over the irony on how these "teabag" parties were protesting a 3% tax increase to what... like 5% of the population, where as the other 95% gets tax cuts? It amazes me how the republican party continually gets people to blindly follow things like this.

[GarfieldJL]

Originally Posted by Kyp Dooran

I can't get over the irony on how these "teabag" parties were protesting a 3% tax increase to what... like 5% of the population, where as the other 95% gets tax cuts? It amazes me how the republican party continually gets people to blindly follow things like this.

That statistic has been proven to be about as truthful as the 90% of the guns in Mexico come the United States. In other words, it is just some lie the Obama Administration and the mainstream media threw out there.

[PastramiX]

Wow, what lovely folk. Where's the Black Panthers when you need them?

[Tyrion]

I guess the world's in a pretty good place when the standard to be a heinous tyrant consists of taxing the rich a bit more than usual.