Originally Posted by pussyluver

Are you saying that the time has come to enforce rights through some sort of civil disobedience or the organization of militias (besides OK)? Careful, your answer could earn you a spot on the "no fly" list.

Another right Americans enjoy is the vote. The vote might just be stronger that bullets and militias. Another right is speech. Many politicians don't seem to be listening to the majority and may find themselves out of a job.

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

As to the person who suggested we vote and use free speech...you haven't been paying attention. The government is doing what it damn well wants regardless of what the people who pay the bills are screaming for. The people roundly said no to the bailouts and they were granted behind closed doors. They voiced their opinions on health care, and yet again were largely ignored. And the final insult may have been the Supreme Court granting corporations--possibly including foreign ones--the right to spend as much money as they want in campaigns which would determine elections of our representatives. I think it's plain they don't have the people in mind.

So the question becomes: when is it enough?

Originally Posted by GatorB

But the thing is it would be the militias fault DC is in ashes to begin with. So why defend people that attack their own country? You either love America or you don't. You either are a patriot or you're Timothy McVeigh.

Originally Posted by theking

Our system is not a Democracy. We are a Republic and out system is that of a Representative Democracy. We elect people to represent us and it is not their job or their duty to represent us by "polls". Every two years members of the House are up for re-election...every six years members of the Senate are up for re-election and every four years the Presidency is up for re-election. If the people do not like the way their Congressman...or Senator...or President represented them the people will not re-elect them. Elections are the time and way for the peoples voices to be heard...loud and clear. That is our system of government.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

You know I read this and just shook my head. Tea party members have been proven to mostly be republicans not all, but most and the sorest losers on the planet. They lost the health-care fight so move on? No. Now 17 states (all republican) are starting lawsuits against federal government knowing full well they won't win but their reasoning is for some sort of legal protest!

This is one of many reasons why i'd never adopt their politics because they wanted to shoot down health-care due to costs but have no problem spending millions of dollars (they can't afford) tying up the court system with frivolous lawsuits just to make a point, knowing full well it's now THE LAW.

The problem is the Tea Party and it's members are nothing but tools because they are so easily lead on bullshit stuff. You do realize in 2008 both Dems/Republicans citizens flooded Congress/Senate with calls of protest on the bank funding bail-out.

They still passed the funding bail-out bill against the majority of the people. In short, the US just had it first financial coup d'état ...and you are worrying about what some black politicians said?

TOOL

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

There's no way to accurately predict what would happen in a Constitutional crisis where the country came to the brink of revolt. Maybe the armed forces would fire on their own people, maybe they wouldn't. In 1989 in Tianenmen Square the Chinese military turned on its own people. Two years later in Red Square the Russian military sided with the people and refused to carry out a coup effectively finishing off communist rule and facilitating the demise of the Soviet Union. In both cases the citizenry was unarmed.

I don't know what would happen here. The militias might cave in the face of better trained, better armed military and police forces. Or perhaps seeing the dissenters as plain folk like their families the kids in the military might refuse to fire.

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

I personally do not believe for one second that a majority of american people did not want healthcare reform. Thats just laughable to me. President Obama ran on several platforms, one of the most important being health care reform. He won the election. ie: the majority of american voters WANTED healthcare reform when it really mattered. It's just a negative talking point now for when people want to roll out poll results favorable to their own position.

Originally Posted by kane

Well said.




Let me play a little devils advocate.

Obama got 53% of the vote or 69million votes. There are around 200 million eligible voters in this country and about 300 million total people. That means only about 34% of the eligible votes and 23% of the population voted for him. He ran on a platform of raising taxes, bailing out companies and creating national healthcare. Today his approval rating hovers around 47-49% depending on the day. So you could argue that aside from the supreme court thing, which he has no part in and was a terrible ruling that sold out the American people, he has delivered what he said he was going to and many of his strongest supporters still support him and his action. He really only cares about them and they are getting what they wanted.

Much of this unrest is simply the right trying to regain their footing. The republican party is a dying animal. In the next 15 years we will see an increase in the black and latino populations (actually it is all ethnic minorities but mostly blacks and latinos) of 300% while the white population will stay about the same. These are groups that tend to vote democrat. Add in the fact that they are losing a grip on the religious right and it makes for a very dim outlook for them 10-15 years from now. They are working hard to build a new base and the tea party is that base. They are switching to the angry white person base and right at the moment it is working. But just because there is a vocal group out there doesn't mean everyone in the country feels that way.

Voting can change it. There is no need for an overthrow. If everyone eligible to vote that was angry at the government voted against those that they don't like, we would have new leadership. No shooting, no uprising, just votes.



To me the question is who should the government be listening to? If a person didn't bother voting, but is against a bailout or a health care bill, should the leaders listen to them? The answer is that they probably should, but they don't because they don't have to because that person isn't going to vote during the election anyway, so they have no fear of that person. If everyone who complained and is angry would actually vote we would potentially have more viable leaders and a third or even fourth party. But as it is about 30% of the population controls the rest of the population.

If you truly want your government to fear you, put the guns down and go to the voting booth on election day. As it is right now the Tea Party thinks they are being revolutionaries and in November they are going to vote republican and many of those people will be no better than the democrats that are there now.

Originally Posted by tony404

When it was muskets against muskets that worked. People talk about how great the army is but they really have no idea the power they can yield at a target. The funny thing is I can sit and talk about all the real things I think obama and the politicians I are doing fucked up all day long and Im a lefty. I don't understand why the right and the tea party has to make up shit. They are protesting apr 15 when 47 percent of this country pays nothing in taxes. They are being played its really sad.

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

Our system is a republican form of democracy and even though we send representatives to the capital they are, in fact, beholden to us. Their job is to represent us, not give us lip service. That's why Congress keeps offices in D.C. and in their districts back home. So they can keep the pulse of the people and listen to what they want. Do you think Congress giving Wall St. those bailouts despite the people being opposed served us? Are you okay with writing off the $1 trillion + and resigning yourself to voting against your representative?

And the part about being able to vote them out of office if they displease us? Well I just laid it out for you. The SCOTUS just handed corporate America, and possibly foreign ones as well, the ability to elect your next representatives. Good luck getting what you need and what Corporate America needs in alignment.


This country came about as a direct result of taxation without representation. More and more Congress is representing not the people, but the special interests and, coming soon, multinational corporations who line their pockets and foot the bill for their campaigns. Your tax dollars, trillions of dollars worth, are going to fight wars against people who've done nothing to you to secure resources and subsidize corporations you don't own for the purpose of private profit. Our republic is becoming a plutocracy. In fact, I'd say it's already there.

Originally Posted by theking

If the people do not like their system of government then the people can change that system of government by creating a viable third party and replacing the incumbents with those of the third party. There are many third parties already in existence and have nominees that run for office but up to this point in time there are not any viable third parties (and if you look at some of their platforms and those they nominate you can understand why). The power lies with the people...but the majority of the people do not exercise their power...so the blame lies with the people.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Yet the left say the right only cuts taxes for the rich

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

the truth is Obama got in office, because he wasn't Hillary and he wasn't Bush

Originally Posted by theking

If the people do not like their system of government then the people can change that system of government by creating a viable third party and replacing the incumbents with those of the third party. There are many third parties already in existence and have nominees that run for office but up to this point in time there are not any viable third parties (and if you look at some of their platforms and those they nominate you can understand why). The power lies with the people...but the majority of the people do not exercise their power...so the blame lies with the people.

Originally Posted by *******

Obama, Bush, Clinton, Ron Paul all have the same masters The 2 party system is just an illusion.

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

I personally do not believe for one second that a majority of american people did not want healthcare reform. Thats just laughable to me.

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

There isn't a viable 3rd party because the two that run the show do everything they can to keep it a two party system. I'll concede that the people deserve to shoulder some of the responsibility, but don't sit and pretend that the government isn't doing anything to preserve the status quo and keep new ideas and fresh leadership from rising to power.

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

There isn't a viable 3rd party because the two that run the show do everything they can to keep it a two party system. I'll concede that the people deserve to shoulder some of the responsibility, but don't sit and pretend that the government isn't doing anything to preserve the status quo and keep new ideas and fresh leadership from rising to power.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

That's because third parties don't work because it's been proven many times on a Governor level. Meaning, it's one of the rare times that Dems & Republicans can get along and come together to filibuster what the third party wants.

You would need a 4th and 5th party system ironically to make a 3rd party system work. But I understand your point..

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

That's because third parties don't work because it's been proven many times on a Governor level. Meaning, it's one of the rare times that Dems & Republicans can get along and come together to filibuster what the third party wants.

You would need a 4th and 5th party system ironically to make a 3rd party system work. But I understand your point..

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

Vendzilla, thats just proving my point. It's a poll; the election is over. Polls will come and polls will go and for a few more years, Obama will be our president. Which is more important?

Originally Posted by tony404

They do for the most part lets not kid our selves.A big chunk of that no tax people is people with kids that get tax credits and people not working. right or left understand this they dont give a fuck about you and me. On both sides and this includes the tea party they tell you what you want to hear.They care about big donations that is all. I learned that after all this bullshit. You think I wouldve learned it sooner. lol

Originally Posted by kane

That wasn't the point. The point is that people are making it out like the entire country is up in arms about what the democrats are doing. I was simply pointing out that those who voted for Obama are getting what he promised them and are happy. Most of the country isn't up in arms. The republican base and some conservatives are.

I don't support everything Obama has done and I am among those who feel that everyone in congress needs to be thrown out and replaced, but I am not blind to the reality that the Tea Party is simply just the republican party with a different name and they will elect the same people who helped to cause the problems we have now.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Whats important is that Obama know the people are paying attention and don't like what he's doing and he's going to loose his power with a controlled house and senate soon and he better take notice. You're telling me that once a person gets in office he can do what ever the hell he wants?

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

In truth Kane, "We The People"... should be the third party. I've come to the opinion if you're not a staunch Independent you are nothing more then a Corporate tool.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

If you think the whole country isn't up in arms, then you need to get out more, away from your bubble, people are pissed, the Tea Party has grown alot in just the last month



The Swiss don't need a militia
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/754.html+

Originally Posted by theking

Actually...yes they can as long as it is legal...until they come up for re-election. BTW...the President has already stated that if he is a one term President...so be it.



The Tea Party has a few thousand "members"...when people start taking to the streets in the tens of millions...then you will see some attention paid to them...but even then...whatever they are demanding will take years to accomplish...as demonstrated by the Vietnam Conflict protests and the Civil Rights protests.

Originally Posted by kane

I'm sure it has grown a lot, but it is still made up mostly of republicans and conservative independents who have a favorable view of the republican party. I'm not saying everyone form the middle left is happy, but the entire country is far from behind up in arms. Most of the country would rather watch American Idol then worry about what their leaders are doing.

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

"President Obama said Friday he plans to withdraw most U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of August 2010.

Between 35,000 to 50,000 troops will remain in Iraq, he said. They would be withdrawn gradually until all U.S. forces are out of Iraq by December 31, 2011 -- the deadline set under an agreement the Bush administration signed with the Iraqi government last year."

So... I dunno what to tell ya. My phrase "coming along nicely" just reflects that it's on track according to reports.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

The tea party is bigger than you think
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ... arty_movement

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Twenty-four percent (24%) of U.S. voters now say they consider themselves a part of the Tea Party movement, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. That?s an eight-point increase from 16% a month ago.

Another 10% say they are not a part of the movement but have close friends or family members who are.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of voters say they have no ties to the Tea Party movement. Eleven percent (11%) more are not sure.

The rise in Tea party support is perhaps not surprising at a time when more voters than ever (58%) favor repeal of the national health care plan just passed by Democrats in Congress and signed into law by President Obama. Most voters remain convinced that the health care plan will require an increase in taxes on the middle class as a time when 66% of voters believe America is already overtaxed.

Forty-two percent (42%) of Republicans say they are part of the movement, compared to nine percent (9%) of Democrats and 24% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Mainstream voters view themselves as Tea Party members, while 84% of the Political Class say they have no ties to the movement.

Originally Posted by kane

I think it is pretty hard to say just who makes up the party. There is this CBS poll http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/po...;contentB ody that says most of the Tea Party is made up republicans and that 62% of them see the republican party in a favorable light.

To me this isn't a new movement, it is mostly a branch of the republican party.

I'd be willing to bet there are probably not many more Tea Party members then there were those who opposed the invasion of Iraq.

Even if the Tea Party movement is growing and getting bigger and bigger, to what end will it bring us? They are simply going to vote for republican candidates most of whom helped get us in the shit sandwich we are now in.

I will be impressed by the Tea Party when I see them put an actual candidate for an office that runs under the Tea Party banner, not under the republican banner.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

I said the same thing in another post (too lazy to find it) we just finished building a billion dollar embassy there. We're not going anywhere because for helping them run/elect a democratic government Iraq signed over 25% of their oil reserves to the US.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Here's the misconseption, it's not a party, it's a movement, it will support the candate they believe best fits the conservative, less govenment, less taxes stand point. Yeah less people are paying less taxes this year, but with the debt we have, they know that won't last, do something like value added tax lke they do in several other countries

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

I said the same thing in another post (too lazy to find it) we just finished building a billion dollar embassy there. We're not going anywhere because for helping them run/elect a democratic government Iraq signed over 25% of their oil reserves to the US.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

Kane, we went there for 2 reasons. First, to secure a vulnerability in the world oil price fixing market. In short, did you know the overhead (2006) for a barrel of oil shipped to the US from Saudi Arabia is $3.85? The rest is profit.

Second, was to pick the battlefield to fight Islamic fanaticism. I actually thought this was a brilliant plan because all the weekend jihadists poured into Iraq to fight the infidels and we didn't have to chase them around the world or make deals with other governments.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Yet the left say the right only cuts taxes for the rich

Originally Posted by kane

I don't disagree with you about the reasons we went there, but I don't think we should have gone. We had no hope of winning this fight. That part of the world has known nothing but unrest and turmoil since the beginning of written history and there is no reason to believe that will ever change. If we pulled every troop out of Iraq today it would only be a matter of time until there was a civil war or a coup and another dictator was put in place.

As for terrorist, sure, we killed some there is no questioning that. I feel for every terrorist we killed we created three. We forget that throughout the middle east the press and media are predominately controlled by the government. We also forget that the education divide and separation of wealth are enormous. So many people there are taught from day one to hate us and they have no way of knowing otherwise. Now they are taught to hate us and they are given the example of us invading a sovereign nation as proof for their hatred. We killed many terrorist and we have others on the run and in 10 years we will be dealing with the hordes of 15 year olds that have spend the last 7 years being taught every day why to hate us and how to kill us.

We can't win in the middle east. You can't reason with people who feel that God loves them and wants them to kill you. You can't spread democracy through the barrel of a gun. We had no chance of winning this and never should have gone. When I hear people say, "We chose to fight them in Iraq instead of on the streets of Baltimore," I laugh. We have had terrorists attacks against this country before and it will happen again. I think they will come at us harder now than in the past because they have a shining example for their hatred.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

Instead of dwelling on the past or what "might" happen we will need to focus on the future and aid in a free movement already in motion like you see in Iran. It won't be long before the youth see new cars, clothes, Starbucks, Etc. and then say fuck whipping this donkey and praying to allah because I could actually buy one of these cars if I want and then the best American export kicks in-greed and piles of tangible shit you think you need.

.... I've spend a lot of time in the Middle East starting 25 years ago living on a Kibbutz in Israel then in 2007 when I spent a summer month in Turkey. Meaning, Turkey was the same way and if you go there now the Turks are for damn sure not praying to allah five times a day..

In short, what you're watching in the making of Corporate colonialism- or a market franchise.

Originally Posted by kane

Sure, it is more of a movement then a party, but here is the fundamental problem with it; they will elect republican candidates who claim they are for spending less, balancing the budget and creating a smaller government. Yet, no republicans actually do this. Just like the democrats they raise the debt, they spend like crazy and ultimately then end up raising taxes one way or another and most of them grow the government.

If anything good comes out of the tea party it will be that maybe they can help support a candidate here and there who will actually do what they say they are going to do and not just lie to our faces then do as they please. Maybe they will end up helping the republicans recapture the house which will force Obama and the democrats to curb their spending to some degree, but I fear the are just the same old thing calling themselves by a new name and we will get the same old candidates that do the same old shit.

Originally Posted by Sausage

Thats because the poor either don't pay tax or don't pay much. The rich pay your way for you.

Originally Posted by crockett

It wouldn't surprise me TBH.. Most seem to be low educated and easily persuaded to follow the crowd with out doing much "thinking". This is why the same group of people went from being Bible Thumping Pro Govt Right Wingers to Tea Bagging Anti Govt bad spellers.

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

Kane, we went there for 2 reasons. First, to secure a vulnerability in the world oil price fixing market. In short, did you know the overhead (2006) for a barrel of oil shipped to the US from Saudi Arabia is $3.85? The rest is profit.

Second, was to pick the battlefield to fight Islamic fanaticism. I actually thought this was a brilliant plan because all the weekend jihadists poured into Iraq to fight the infidels and we didn't have to chase them around the world or make deals with other governments.

Originally Posted by Caligari

Actually i thought you were making a joke!
Reality- US troops will NEVER be out of iraq, this is not obamas fault and shouldnt be his problem but when he starts talking about troop withdrawl etc...just look at the weekly iraqi death tolls, its really a nightmare.

Originally Posted by uno

Your second argument, I've always found, is the weakest of them. "We are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."

That is such total BS when all it takes is 19 guys with box cutters to bring us to our knees. After that we had the shoe bomber(1 guy), the DC sniper (1 guy and a kid), the Virginia Tech shooter(1 guy), the anthrax mailer(1 guy) and many more. It has always amused me when people put that argument forth. It's even more amusing and even scary when people say that there weren't any terrorist attacks on us during Bush(WTF?! as if 9/11 never happened and Bush wasn't the president during the worst attack on us. See: Cheney, Liz Cheney, Hannity, Rudy, et al).