|baleen - 2011-10-21 |
Very strange to hear how the original intentions of the Tea Party when it was just a small conservative libertarian movement were transformed into standard cena-like conservative blustering.
The Tea Party was a little more astroturf than grass roots. The GOP is pretty well organized, and they have some cunning and well funded allies who definitely authored and shaped a lot of the Tea Party's identity.
Also, one of the smears used against OWS has been that their message isn't clear...of course, everyone who says that is under the impression that the Tea Party's message just magically solidified the day it way formed.
The origins of the Tea Part ARE grassroots. As the guy said, the first protest was just 50 people protesting the bank bailout. Maybe this guy is doing a little coopting himself, or maybe the original Tea Party people are seeing OWS as a way of getting some of their original demands.
No more bank bailouts, an end to the Fed, etc. It just seems that a lot of the essential views on government are so different than I can't see it being a viable partnership. Most people on these streets see universal healthcare as a fundamental function of government. It's certainly what many libertarians in Europe believe.
I thought it was pretty much established among most non-retards as having been mostly astroturf. For example, the eXile did a story on this:
The tea party was true grass roots. The Astro-Turf bullshit just came from liberals trying to discredit the movement. I was down with the party at first, but I do hate what It became. Perhaps some of the original tea partiers can get involved with Occupy Wall Street and clean them up.
The initial tea party was grass roots, yes, but it failed because it was co-opted by the social conservative machine, which is perhaps larger than the Republican party it dominates.
Cena how many coast guards stick their penises into your poo hole in a given hour? Do you rub the poo on your face and make videos for them?
|Scrotum H. Vainglorious - 2011-10-21 |
Is he interfacing with the TRON master computer in the background there?
|Change - 2011-10-21 |
|erratic - 2011-10-21 |
Ralph Nader and Ron Paul have been getting friendly lately too. Now that would be an interesting ticket
To be perfectly honest, that would make no god damn sense.
A Free Market Libertarian + an Anti-Free Market, Consumer Protection and Socialized Healthcare Fanatic = throwing two cats in a bag and watching them tear each other's throats out.
They're both pushing 80. They'll be dead or senile before they make it through their first term.
|themilkshark - 2011-10-21 |
Love that pie graph
|Robin Kestrel - 2011-10-21 |
"America: You'll Get Screwed, But You Won't Know How!"
|godot - 2011-10-22 |
Also, I've no idea how influential this guy was in the original tea party movement, but his blog is among the top 20 in the financial category, and I can't say I stand too far apart from him: social libertarian, fiscal liberal (in the original sense), pro science, upset that the bible browsers are winning (sorta the present Democratic Party without the trial lawyers and unions).
The problem for the U.S. is that its electoral system forces a bilateral party system, and that means anyone who might vote "Liberal" in the UK gets to begrudgingly support a trial lawyer or a corporate rights advocate.
The Democratic Party are "bible browsers?"
Ocyrus, yeah, but it's primarily the single-winner voting system that has lead to the Big Two rapists being able to wield the Democracy-breaking power that they enjoy, isn't it?
|OgreMkIV - 2011-10-22 |
Both factions are anarchists, just different kinds.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|