Tea Party Flourishes
Cliff
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/the-tea-party-flourishes_b_413876.html
"The Tea Party Flourishes, Progressives Flounder, Wall Street Wins"
Well worth the read.
--
Cliff
edi...@netpath.net
class Americans lost ground under both the Democrat liberal Klintons
regime and the Republican pseudoconservative Bush regime - and now
again are losing ground under the Democrat commie Obama regime.
http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!
HH&C
> The Tea Party gets the allegiance of the masses because MOST middle-
> class Americans lost ground under both the Democrat liberal Klintons
> regime and the Republican pseudoconservative Bush regime - and now
> again are losing ground under the Democrat commie Obama regime.
>
Coincided with NAFTA and most favored nation trading status with China.
Lookout
The term "progressives" was coined by conservatives to try and split
the democrats.
The teabaggers named themselves and are succeeding in splitting the
republican vote as proved by the loss of a republican seat in New
York. I LOVE the teabaggers!
Dan
And hundreds of thousands of other unrelated happenstances...
Coincidence is not causation.
However, point of information: Clinton was NOT a liberal, he was more
Republican than most Republicans, and Obama is not even a liberal ,let
alone a "commie."
If you fools cannot even get your vocabulary straight, how do you expect
to be taken in the least seriously?
Dan
Mitchell Holman
> HH&C wrote:
>> On Jan 7, 11:17 am, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
>>> The Tea Party gets the allegiance of the masses because MOST middle-
>>> class Americans lost ground under both the Democrat liberal Klintons
>>> regime and the Republican pseudoconservative Bush regime - and now
>>> again are losing ground under the Democrat commie Obama regime.
>>>
>>> http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com- your source for hard-to-find stuff!
>>
>> Coincided with NAFTA and most favored nation trading status with
China.
>
> And hundreds of thousands of other unrelated happenstances...
>
> Coincidence is not causation.
>
> However, point of information: Clinton was NOT a liberal, he was more
> Republican than most Republicans,
The "radical liberal" Clinton who supported:
The Death Penalty
The War on Drugs
NAFTA
GATT
Mandatory Drug Testing
Warrantless searches
Warrantless wiretaps
Sending troops abroad on "peacekeeping" missions
(shades of Greneda/Beirut/Panama, anyone?)
The Gulf War, part one
The Gulf War, part two
The "Defense of Marriage Act"
The "Communications Decency Act"
Excluding gays from the military
Doing a brisk business with China despite their human rights record
Doing business with Indonesia despite their human rights record
Accepting money from tobacco interests
Accepting money from defense contractors
Accepting money from the banking "industry"
Accepting money from the insurance "industry"
"Ending welfare as we know it"
Balancing the budget
Blocking local attempts to legalize marijuana
> and Obama is not even a liberal ,let
> alone a "commie."
The "Radical Liberal" Obama who:
Voted every time to fund the Iraq war when he got the chance.
Voted for the bankruptcy reform bill.
Voted for the Patriot Act.
Voted for FISA.
Voted for the Class Action Fairness Act.
Voted for the 700 billion bailout of criminal bankers.
Voted for Bush's telecom immunity bill.
Supports expanding the death penalty.
Nominates Republican after Republican to his administration.
Rightwingers would not recognize a "radical liberal"
if they had one over for dinner...........
Dan
I guess that is what comes from parroting, rather than thinking.
Dan
Observer
And George W. Bush fixed *which* of these atrocities?
>> and Obama is not even a liberal ,let
>> alone a "commie."
>
>
>
>
> The "Radical Liberal" Obama who:
>
>
>Voted every time to fund the Iraq war when he got the chance.
>Voted for the bankruptcy reform bill.
>Voted for the Patriot Act.
>Voted for FISA.
>Voted for the Class Action Fairness Act.
>Voted for the 700 billion bailout of criminal bankers.
>Voted for Bush's telecom immunity bill.
>Supports expanding the death penalty.
>Nominates Republican after Republican to his administration.
>
>
> Rightwingers would not recognize a "radical liberal"
>if they had one over for dinner...........
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__
The last official act of any government is the looting of the nation.
HH&C
> HH&C wrote:
> > On Jan 7, 11:17 am, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
> >> The Tea Party gets the allegiance of the masses because MOST middle-
> >> class Americans lost ground under both the Democrat liberal Klintons
> >> regime and the Republican pseudoconservative Bush regime - and now
> >> again are losing ground under the Democrat commie Obama regime.
>
>
> > Coincided with NAFTA and most favored nation trading status with China.
>
> And hundreds of thousands of other unrelated happenstances...
>
> Coincidence is not causation.
>
> However, point of information: Clinton was NOT a liberal, he was more
> Republican than most Republicans, and Obama is not even a liberal ,let
> alone a "commie."
>
> If you fools cannot even get your vocabulary straight, how do you expect
> to be taken in the least seriously?
>
> Dan
You're off topic. Go away troll.
HH&C
> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:11:21 -0500, Cliff
>
>
> >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/the-tea-party-flourishes_b_...
> > "The Tea Party Flourishes, Progressives Flounder, Wall Street Wins"
>
> > Well worth the read.
>
> The term "progressives" was coined by conservatives to try and split
> the democrats.
Ah, no! There are books written about the "progressive era." Try
reading one.
Gray Ghost
news:dsfdk55ro9kv5g3pt...@4ax.com:
No you pathetic dullard.
"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance
between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the
statesmanship of the day." - 1912 Progressive Party Platform, attributed to
Theodore Roosevelt[1] and quoted again in his autobiography[2] where he
connects Trusts and monopolies (sugar interests, Standard Oil, etc.) to
Woodrow Wilson and William Howard Taft, and consequently both major political
parties.
--
Al Gore didn't invent the internet, but he did invent Global Warming.
"Hide the Decline"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGKVk
31,486 American scientists, including 9,029 with PhDs, don't agree the
science is settled.
http://www.petitionproject.org/
What it appears to be all about
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEZszGJHbK4&feature=video_response
Siobhan Medeiros
wrote:
> Lookout <mrLook...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:dsfdk55ro9kv5g3pt...@4ax.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:11:21 -0500, Cliff
>
> >>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/the-tea-party-flourishes_b_...
> >>6.html
> >> "The Tea Party Flourishes, Progressives Flounder, Wall Street Wins"
>
> >> Well worth the read.
>
> > The term "progressives" was coined by conservatives to try and split
> > the democrats.
> > The teabaggers named themselves and are succeeding in splitting the
> > republican vote as proved by the loss of a republican seat in New
> > York. I LOVE the teabaggers!
>
> No you pathetic dullard.
>
> "To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance
> between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the
> statesmanship of the day." - 1912 Progressive Party Platform, attributed to
> Theodore Roosevelt[1] and quoted again in his autobiography[2] where he
> connects Trusts and monopolies (sugar interests, Standard Oil, etc.) to
> Woodrow Wilson and William Howard Taft, and consequently both major political
> parties.
>
So Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt were both progressives? Pretty
good endorsement in my book!
> --
> Al Gore didn't invent the internet, but he did invent Global Warming.
>
> "Hide the Decline"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGKVk
>
Which means absolutely nothing when taken in context.
> 31,486 American scientists, including 9,029 with PhDs, don't agree the
> science is settled.http://www.petitionproject.org/
Oh, please. The OISM project is a farce. Pure fraud.
>
> What it appears to be all abouthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEZszGJHbK4&feature=video_response
A broken link?
Cliff
Ghost) wrote:
>Lookout <mrLo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:dsfdk55ro9kv5g3pt...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:11:21 -0500, Cliff
>><Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/the-tea-party-flourishes_b_41387
>>>6.html
>>> "The Tea Party Flourishes, Progressives Flounder, Wall Street Wins"
>>>
>>> Well worth the read.
>>
>> The term "progressives" was coined by conservatives to try and split
>> the democrats.
>> The teabaggers named themselves and are succeeding in splitting the
>> republican vote as proved by the loss of a republican seat in New
>> York. I LOVE the teabaggers!
>>
>
>No you pathetic dullard.
>
>"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance
>between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the
>statesmanship of the day." - 1912 Progressive Party Platform, attributed to
>Theodore Roosevelt[1] and quoted again in his autobiography[2] where he
>connects Trusts and monopolies (sugar interests, Standard Oil, etc.) to
>Woodrow Wilson and William Howard Taft, and consequently both major political
>parties.
So they were opposed to fascism.
Why are you for it?
Explain in detail.
--
Cliff
Dan
Well, ONE of us is a troll. >>I<< was speaking on topic, you were not.
QED.
Dan
Lookout
(Gray Ghost) wrote:
>Lookout <mrLo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:dsfdk55ro9kv5g3pt...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:11:21 -0500, Cliff
>><Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/the-tea-party-flourishes_b_41387
>>>6.html
>>> "The Tea Party Flourishes, Progressives Flounder, Wall Street Wins"
>>>
>>> Well worth the read.
>>
>> The term "progressives" was coined by conservatives to try and split
>> the democrats.
>> The teabaggers named themselves and are succeeding in splitting the
>> republican vote as proved by the loss of a republican seat in New
>> York. I LOVE the teabaggers!
>>
>
>No you pathetic dullard.
>
>"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance
>between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the
>statesmanship of the day." - 1912 Progressive Party Platform, attributed to
>Theodore Roosevelt[1] and quoted again in his autobiography[2] where he
>connects Trusts and monopolies (sugar interests, Standard Oil, etc.) to
>Woodrow Wilson and William Howard Taft, and consequently both major political
>parties.
TODAY you dumbass. TODAY
Fuck you're an idiot
V
wrote:
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/the-tea-party-flourishes_b_...
> � "TheTeaPartyFlourishes, Progressives Flounder, Wall Street Wins"
>
> � Well worth the read.
> --
> Cliff
Tea party threw me out...
I joined a Tea party online forum in Ohio Valley. After 3 or 4 posts
they banned me. Was run by a power hungry lady it seems. She only
liked to hear herself talk. Said I was a 'trouble maker' for having an
opinion.
Had to laugh...didn't the tea parties back in the day cause trouble?
Lets hope this lady never makes it into politics.
Anyway, tea baggers are all bark and no bite. Develop some self
sufficiency and organize a citizens union to strike the corrupt
political system...they you will be really making tea my friends.
As far as 3rd party? Could we do much worse than being fed our diet of
shit? Sure we could theoretically do worse, but we could always go
back to the old diet of scumbag reps and dems.
Let's say the dream of the tea party would come true and they would
get a tea bagger prez in office. The house and senate is run by the
good old boys (dems and reps) and would not work with the tea prez. It
would just be one big brawl day in day out.
Now, if you could change the house and senate to tea baggers, in
quantities enough to get things done, then you may have something
workable.
And, most important, start returning the 'power to the people' by
having national votes on most of the legislation the tea baggers
propose. This is the only way you would have a chance to change the
political status quo. (But I think this is all fantasy and wishful
thinking myself.)
But, don't be under the delusion of thinking that tea baggers will fix
all our woes. You must accept we have built a defective model for long
term population support in the world and very much in America.
I've heard people on TV say they just want their old America back?
America's golden age was back in the 50's. Yes, it was a marvelous
time to have lived. But alas, it is far gone and never to return...so
start getting used to it.
China is positioned to take over as the number one world super power
and by mid century Hispanics will be a projected 33% of the pop in the
US of A...that is 1 out of 3 people will be Hispanics.
Now, I got nothing against Hispanics. They are hard working and nice
people in general. I was born in L.A. and lived there for 35 years, so
being outnumbered by Hispanics is nothing new to me. Last time I was
in L.A. I thought I was in Mexico. I just bring this stat up to
underscore that fact that our world is always evolving...and
flexibility is the hallmark of a good survivalist.
But, whether we are #1 or #2 in the world and irrespective of our
favorite national food is hamburgers or Tacos - we should still work
in a direction to run our country under the principles America was
founded on to the best of our abilities.