Stupid Liberal Son of a Bitch

[Moontanman]

More like not paying attention to examples in history revealing what an effective lying/propaganda machine can bring (often in the way of thoroughly corrupting a government), along with its adoring followers not having a clue what's next....but resentful of those who haven't joined in before then.

 

 

 

Possibly you missed where I said "context included"? (NOT excluded) Wanna try again?

 

See, it's pretty easy to miss the little things which are most important to see what's really there -- and it's a very big clue to the election results.

 

 

 

Except you did say "Let's take a look at how accurate that perception is" in response to ajb's examples of tea party lunatics.

 

Your assessment I had mentioned? It would be that sentence in quotes.

 

So again, is your assessment of whichever you meant -- the accuracy of the researcher, or, ajb's claim -- based on personal interactions with tea rallies, or just on detailed accounts?

 

 

 

Lol sure, you have fun with that.

 

(to quote a certain mod)

 

It's pretty funny that supposed Independents claim Obama "mistook" his landslide election as a mandate for universal healthcare. But what's there to mistake? Did the independent voters miss Obama's promise of universal healthcare during his campaign? If so, did they expect Obama to read voters minds who elected him after they knew he promised to work on it?

 

No, the simple reality is they went and drank bad tea.

 

Steeped with lies.

 

The real tea, the real patriotic tea, happened in the New England states -- the liberal heartland. Today a new imposter of a tea brews in the South, the very ones who preferred Britain's rule and didn't wanna join the fight against her.

 

Why'd they prefer Britain rule? The more liberal northern colonies* sought freedom of religion, while the southern colonies had more Loyalists -- rich aristrocrats from England who preferred the status quo of the British system. And now the tradition continues, but with the South's true patriots hopelessly outmatched by another group that's loyal to the powerful elite.

 

Read your history....of the South's relation to England in colonial times, and, most interestingly....which part of the colonial U.S. had most of the rich Loyalists migrate to it from Britain.

 

 

P.S. It wasn't Moontanman you're supposed to be quoting, that would be meeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

 

P.P.S. Why did the so-called "Independents" also take six years to mass against Bush/Republicans, when immediately following 9/11 the nation's unity was (deviously) challenged by Karl Rove personally labeling the Democrats as Weak on Terror, labeling the U.S. justice system as wanting to give terrorists sympathy and understanding, etc, with the Republican Party joining in the chorus amongst its elected officials loud and clear, transforming 9/11 into a giant political opportunity for amassing their power.

 

A clue: the independents are nothing more than a collection of people with 1) voter apathy, distrusting every party like I did back in the day, 2) nonpartisan people having no idea what's going on but still influenced by propaganda they hear, 3) bandwagon voters who fancy the political label, or 4) truly independent people who do all the homework necessary on every candidate AND party leaderships including the shenanegans -- this last category is probably the fewest in number, unfortunately.

 

 

*The further up North you went in the colonies, the less slavery existed. The middle colonies (New York, Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware) had less slaves than the colonies in the South, but the least occurences of slavery were in the New England states: the liberal bastion of the U.S. today -- with friends in the West Coast and somewhat up North -- and the original, courageous, REAL tea partyers....who faced death or imprisonment if caught, and who dumped tea belonging to corporate interests protected by government via unfair tax breaks.

 

As you see, things don't change very easily. But it's not a coincidence the South is mostly a bastion of conservatism, nor that it supports powerful corporate interests wholeheartedly the very way it supported powerful Britain at a time.

 

Now you may see what's possibly coming next under the strategic pretenses of wanting to "take America back". The simple phrase has a double meaning, if you note. (for example, if Britain had uttered it -- or if descendents of its southern colonists' rich/powerful elite had)

 

 

This is a great post dude....

[divagreen]

This is a great post dude....

 

No, it is not...

 

It is misinformation.

 

Cite your sources, Bear Keys, as to where the Tea Party started and where they received their funding.

 

And if you can...try not to conflate it with the politics of the civil war...

 

That would be lovely.

 

Then we can share a cuppa tea.

Edited November 4, 2010 by divagreen

[The Bear's Key]

Cite your sources, Bear Keys, as to where the Tea Party started and where they received their funding.

I guess we can first start with your post on the subject.

 

 

And if you can...try not to conflate it with the politics of the civil war...

Sure, and I didn't. My subject's timeline goes to before the Revolutionary War period. It had slaves also.

 

As for the Koch brothers, they're from the south, no? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Family_Foundations#Political_activities

 

 

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?printable=true

(your link)

 

The Kochs are on a whole different level. There’s no one else who has spent this much money. The sheer dimension of it is what sets them apart. They have a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it

.....

Americans for Prosperity has worked closely with the Tea Party since the movement’s inception. In the weeks before the first Tax Day protests, in April, 2009, Americans for Prosperity hosted a Web site offering supporters “Tea Party Talking Points.” The Arizona branch urged people to send tea bags to Obama; the Missouri branch urged members to sign up for “Taxpayer Tea Party Registration” and provided directions to nine protests.

Everything's in the article you quoted from in the other thread. And bascule's posted info a while back on Fox News staging Tea Wackjob rallies in the early days of its "movement".

 

You pullling a jest? Eh?

[Pangloss]

Possibly you missed where I said "context included"? (NOT excluded) Wanna try again?

 

Well IMO with O'Donnell the context often wasn't included. But IMO O'Donnell's problem wasn't context anyway, it was people looking for a reason to bash a Republican.

 

Not that I particularly cared for her -- she seemed pretty thinly disguised herself. I think if you were to pour a bucket of water over her hea... er... I mean if you were to shine a little more light on her message you would not have found a whole lot of substance. (cof) But seriously, very reminiscent of Palin in 2008. But that's no reason to burn her at the stake. (er, so to speak... cof cof) ;-)

 

 

Anyway, nice rant though. I may not agree with your conclusions but you always make a good case.

[divagreen]

 

As for the Koch brothers, they're from the south, no? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Family_Foundations#Political_activities

 

The Koch brothers were born and raised in Kansas, which is in the midwest, luv.

 

David Koch currently lives in New York and Charles still lives in Kansas.

 

Please do not insult my delicate southern sensibilities by insinuating that the Tea Party Movement in any shape or form started in the south. You will give me the vapours.

 

If I am not mistaken, the first Tea Party rally started in New York by Trevor Leach.

 

:D

[The Bear's Key]

Mirror, mirror, into the past....?

 

http://www.suite101.com/content/apprehensive-aristocrats-a33902

 

A typical New England citizen might see freedom and equality as having a voice in their own destiny. In contrast, many large plantation owners in South Carolinian thought of freedom as the liberty to preserve and maintain their social and economic power base.

.....

Freedom's Hypocrisy

 

The anxious “aristocracy” in all of the southern colonies exhibited this very strong but sometimes distorted bent toward independence. This exemplified the often unacknowledged double minded thinking that was lambasted in some of the British and American Tory literature. One British author, Samuel Johnson formed this thought provoking question to penetrate the hypocrisy.

 

“How is it, that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?"

 

 

http://www.suite101.com/content/the-middling-sort-a33817

 

Eighteenth century America raised families whose education was for the most part, superior to most in the world at that time. They tended to be "artisans and mechanics", which today we call "blue collar" workers. Their economic influence was not formidable except when they banded together in unions or clubs for the express purpose of interrupting trade for their own advantage.

.....

This northeast region was, perhaps, the most "democratic" region of colonial America. While by no means without its social hierarchy, their town meetings lent a sense of social leveling and thereby a sense of control over one's destiny that did not exist in the southern colonies.

........

The Melting Pot

 

In the middle colonies of New York, The Jerseys, Pennsylvania, and Delaware this middle class also had a sense of strength...Even in the 17th century, New York had the same "melting pot" characteristics we still see today. It was the place you went to in America to see the most diversity of culture. There are early accounts of New Amsterdam as being a safe haven for Jews and even reports of seeing followers of “Mohamet”.

Amazing, eh?

 

Remember, that's all from the 1700s -- long before the civil war.

 

 

 

Here's a flashback sentiment that mimicks the Right elite of today...who fight against granting a bit more economic freedom to those people who most easily get sucked into the dead-end-job mortal grip of huge $$ industries/factories that pay shit, lifelong debt, and the sinking feeling of being trapped.

 

 

...many large plantation owners in South Carolinian thought of freedom as the liberty to preserve and maintain their social and economic power base. Indeed, there was always a subconscious (if not at times openly conscious) fear that their own sins would find them out if a slave rebellion ever actually materialized. This was a very real fear in an 18th century society whose slave population was as high as 65%. The social dichotomy of pride in their property and position along with the underlying guilt in the method used to obtain it fueled some strange ideas and horrifying social abuses.

i.e. workers laboring in deplorable conditions vastly outnumber the types of "business" elite who lack the technique to be human in the way that the various other rich and powerful human beings are. So if the workers join in union and/or get more liberties, then the riches/power of solely the lacking-in humanity elites are dwindled/threatened by it.

 

What's funny too is how such elites are quick to retort that we have far more liberties than most of the world, as if they somehow were directly responsible for it. No, the actions by liberals were directly responsible for it, starting with Lincoln and the original Republican Party back in their liberal days of strong government and civil rights.

 

 

P.S. In anticipation of replies protesting the indirect comparison with racism, four points...

 

1. 
    
   
2. I don't back down from an unpleasant thought. Neither should you. If you reveal a horrible thing done by progressives/liberals, if true I'll admit it. My usual reply is we must ensure it doesn't happen again, carefully inspecting the roots of what let it occur. By denying it, that ensures it'll happen again.
   
3. There's no blanket comparisons about the rich and powerful -- only vs those whose general policies seem extremely devoid of the humanity found in various other examples of the rich and/or powerful.
   
4. The crux of the problem hasn't been a typical variety racism, in my view. It's been the purposeful amplification of it via hate propaganda, a strategy for thinning out the power of the least fortunate majority. The 1% of richest keep their 90%, if we're divided. (a select few among those 1%, the ones whose exploitation of laborers consistently go too far)
   
5. I'm just not politically correct (although many of the Right's elites are, but pretend they're never. Yet muddy up anything sacred/essential to their version of the Right's image, and their political correctness howls loudly into the winds of media)
   

 

 

The Koch brothers were born and raised in Kansas, which is in the midwest

You're correct, perhaps I had thought the Bible Belt. In any case, I never said the Tea Party's from the South, just that it's a bastion of conservatism for a historical reason -- although a great many of its conservative people are decent/kind, their good spirit is currently outmatched by a minority of individuals whose philosophy is like their Loyalist ancestors (worship greed/power at the cost of humanity) and who's propaganda is a giant machine steamrolling the nation.

 

Please do not insult my delicate southern sensibilities by insinuating that the Tea Party Movement in any shape or form started in the south.

But even so, its stronghold is there. Although the good people of the South are the norm, they currently seem a bit helpless against the devious machinery of the Tea Wackjobs.

 

I like the South, and the purpose of the above comparisons with our past is to reveal today's ideological battles/divisions as a continuation of past struggles by the types of poweful aristocrats found immediately before the Revolutionary era -- who continue to view themselves as entitled to make $$ regardless of how much other people, the environment, and the world suffers for the harmful physical effects caused directly by the manner in which that $$ is profited.

 

The South by far isn't made up of those greedy people, yet the ideology such people built to hone/maintain/protect their greed has strong roots -- tainting not only the region, but conservative ideology in the U.S. and many other places around the world.

 

Greed exists in all places, but the ideology* that strategically defends and outright encourages it has roots in the Southern greedy aristocrats from the Revolutionary War era -- and back then, still vastly outnumbered by the southern good people, but who seem unable to halt the greedy (yet vastly fewer in number) people's activities.

 

*(or devious rewrite of it)

Edited November 4, 2010 by The Bear's Key

[Moontanman]

Maybe we can get the war between the states heated back up!

 

The rude, aggressive, Yankee Patriots

 

vs

 

The mannerly, gentile, Southern Loyalists

 

 

ARE YOU READY TO RUMBLE?

[divagreen]

Maybe we can get the war between the states heated back up!

 

The rude, aggressive, Yankee Patriots

 

vs

 

The mannerly, gentile, Southern Loyalists

 

 

ARE YOU READY TO RUMBLE?

 

I doubt that there will be a war between the north and the south started here, because I don't think that Bear's Key is from the States; he knows too much about American history.

 

Mea culpa, Bear's Key. Cheers.

[Moontanman]

I doubt that there will be a war between the north and the south started here, because I don't think that Bear's Key is from the States; he knows too much about American history.

 

Mea culpa, Bear's Key. Cheers.

 

 

Good point, he can't be from the USA, probably a British Imperialist

[Pangloss]

I curse thedamnyankees all the time. Usually from early April to mid-October.