The TRUE story of the Tea Party

[FORD]

[ELVIS]

No way am I watching Mr Creepy...

[FORD]

You really should watch this. It's about an important piece of American history, and also about how imperialism and predatory capitalism always go together.

[Nitro Express]

When corporations and governments collude for monopoly control it's called fascism. The US has morphed into a fascist government right now because the American citizens got distracted by easy loans, entertainment, and toys and stopped watching the store. The bankers and corporations took over when Bubba Bumblefuck had dreams of getting rich quick flipping real estate and charging up a mountain of debt on toys he could shove into the three car garage on his overpriced McMansion. That's ok though, because Country Wide was offering a mortgage to anyone with a pulse and Walmart had great deals on those Jesse James signature made in China tools and the talking bass Bubba could hang on the wall of his man cave. The G Gordon Liddy stacked and packed calendar and the custom AR-15 in the corner gave the illusion Bubba was free.

[Unchainme]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_People's_History_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Patriot's_History_of_the_United_States

Reading both of these at the same time is usually the best for truly understanding America's History from a balanced POV btw.

[fifth element]

was actually very interesting...thx

[Blaze]

Future jobs won’t support decent living standard: Report

t's most welcome news that job growth seems to be picking up again--even if we'll need a whole lot more of it to get back to where we were before the Great Recession.

Still, as we've reported, there's growing evidence that the new jobs, many of which are in sectors like retail, food services, and health care, simply aren't as good--in terms of wages, hours, and seniority--as the ones they're replacing. And a report released today only adds to the concern.

The study, commissioned by the nonprofit group Wider Opportunities for Women, looks at how much income it takes to support a basic standard of living for an American family--and finds that many of the jobs of the future won't pay enough to provide that.

To calculate this "economic security" income, the study's authors certainly didn't assume a lavish lifestyle. They considered basic needs--housing, food, utilities, health care, child-care, and transportation--plus the cost of modest saving for retirement and a small surplus for emergencies. (At at a time when economic "shocks" are increasingly common, that's an essential part of financial security.) They don't factor in some things many of us take for granted, like entertainment or eating out.

The result? To achieve economic security, a single parent with two children needs an income of just over $30,000 a year--nearly twice the federal minimum wage--while a two-income household needs almost $68,000.

The study then finds that, according to Labor Department projections, fewer than 13 percent of jobs to be created by 2018 will meet the economic security threshold for a single parent with two kids. Forty-three percent of those jobs will meet the threshold for a two-income household.

In other words, most of the jobs of the future aren't likely to pay enough to offer the kind of stable, middle-class existence that for much of the 20th century was seen as the American birthright.

"The American Dream of working hard to support your family is being re-written by the growth of low-paying industries and rising expenses," said Joan Kuriansky, WOW's executive director.

Indeed, this seems to be the new reality of the American economic landscape. Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution, noted in a statement on the government's jobs numbers that real earnings fell 1.1 percent between October and February--a development he attributed to the still-high unemployment rate, which is eroding workers' bargaining power.

(With a list of school supplies and calculator in hand, Diamond Emory, left, compares prices of erasable markers with her five-year-old son Eric at a Wal-Mart store in Canal Winchester, Ohio.: Kiichiro Sato/AP)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110401/ts_yblog_thelookout/future-jobs-wont-support-decent-living-standard-report

[FORD]

And if FAUX "News" had been on the air back then........

[BigBadBrian]

Tea Party Patriots Mission Statement and Core Values


Mission Statement
The impetus for the Tea Party movement is excessive government spending and taxation. Our mission is to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.


Core Values
•Fiscal Responsibility
•Constitutionally Limited Government
•Free Markets


Fiscal Responsibility: Fiscal Responsibility by government honors and respects the freedom of the individual to spend the money that is the fruit of their own labor. A constitutionally limited government, designed to protect the blessings of liberty, must be fiscally responsible or it must subject its citizenry to high levels of taxation that unjustly restrict the liberty our Constitution was designed to protect. Such runaway deficit spending as we now see in Washington D.C. compels us to take action as the increasing national debt is a grave threat to our national sovereignty and the personal and economic liberty of future generations.

Constitutionally Limited Government: We, the members of The Tea Party Patriots, are inspired by our founding documents and regard the Constitution of the United States to be the supreme law of the land. We believe that it is possible to know the original intent of the government our founders set forth, and stand in support of that intent. Like the founders, we support states' rights for those powers not expressly stated in the Constitution. As the government is of the people, by the people and for the people, in all other matters we support the personal liberty of the individual, within the rule of law.

Free Markets: A free market is the economic consequence of personal liberty. The founders believed that personal and economic freedom were indivisible, as do we. Our current government's interference distorts the free market and inhibits the pursuit of individual and economic liberty. Therefore, we support a return to the free market principles on which this nation was founded and oppose government intervention into the operations of private business.


Our Philosophy
Tea Party Patriots, Inc. as an organization believes in the Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and Free Markets. Tea Party Patriots, Inc. is a non-partisan grassroots organization of individuals united by our core values derived from the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America, the Bill Of Rights as explained in the Federalist Papers. We recognize and support the strength of grassroots organization powered by activism and civic responsibility at a local level. We hold that the United States is a republic conceived by its architects as a nation whose people were granted "unalienable rights" by our Creator. Chiefly among these are the rights to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The Tea Party Patriots stand with our founders, as heirs to the republic, to claim our rights and duties which preserve their legacy and our own. We hold, as did the founders, that there exists an inherent benefit to our country when private property and prosperity are secured by natural law and the rights of the individual. As an organization we do not take stances on social issues. We urge members to engage fully on the social issues they consider important and aligned with their beliefs.

[BigBadBrian]

One of you "progressives" care to explain exactly what you disagree with in the tea party statement above?

[ELVIS]

FORD's just gonna say they sock KKKoch...

[Nitro Express]

Let's dress up like indians and raid Wal-Mart. I always wanted to loot and vandalize a store. One of my dreams is to knock down the store shelves so they go over like dominos.

[FORD]

FORD's just gonna say they sock KKKoch...

The teabagger "movement" is 100% KKKoch funded astroturf, so that would be a true statement (aside from your typo)

[knuckleboner]

One of you "progressives" care to explain exactly what you disagree with in the tea party statement above?

sure. they seem well enough by themselves, but it's the devil that's in the details.

fiscal responsiblity? great. sign me up. but whose fiscal responsibility? even the tea party members in congress acknowledge there has to be a deficit next year. and probably a big one. paul ryan (not a tea partier, and actually, though i disagree with his policies generally, he's a politician i like), has almost $1 trillion in deficit next year. so the question isn't debt or no debt. it's how much debt? and it's not necessarily a case of more debt bad, less debt always good. too much cutting now leads to a bad economy, at least in the short term. hence why even most of the tea partiers don't advocate balancing the budget next year. yet the tea party people have given the impression that the only question is whether or not the cuts are enough. and i definitely disagree with that limited view.

constitutionally limited government. ok, i sort of agree with this. but sort of don't. no, the federal government should not do everything. however, our founders CLEARLY wanted to limit state's rights. they had the articles of confederation and ditched it. they wanted a stronger federal government for a reason. and like it or not, a stronger federal government helped lead to America becoming the global leader. personally, i have no desire to return us back to 1786.

free markets. ok, generally good. but not always, at least not in terms of theoretical perfect capitalism. and i definitely disagree with the notion of no government involvement in private business. i encourage the health inspector to make sure that the mcdonald's isn't using arsenic as a preservative. i welcome the FAA grounding 737s before they crash. i support clean water regulations. i like that the bane of, but oftentimes inherent result of perfect capitalism - monopolies - aren't allowed free reign.

so, in general, i think the tea party philosophy is fine, but likely overly simplistic. the world is far more complicated, and easy principles don't always work in practice.

[Seshmeister]

One of you "progressives" care to explain exactly what you disagree with in the tea party statement above?

Name some teabaggers who want defence cuts or that big business will pay some tax.

Without that they are pissing in the wind.

Also could you explain why your statement does not mention sex, marriage, religion, no blacks in government or family planning yet that is 96.8% of the chat you hear from these people.