[identity profile] paft.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] talkpolitics
Dick Morris on Sean Hannity, 2/28/11:

We may at long last have a way to liberate our nation from the domination of those who should be our public servants but instead are frequently our union masters and free our politics from their financial power…What is at stake here really is freeing our schools so that we could keep good teachers and fire bad ones, freeing our state government so we don’t have high local taxes (and exactly how are those good teachers going to be paid?) and obliterating the financial power base of the Democratic Party.




The money quote is underlined above. This attack on collective bargaining is not about helping kids. It’s about establishing what amounts to a one-party system. Eliminate the power of unions and the G.O.P., with its corporate backing, gets to run things pretty much unopposed.

These people do not grasp the most basic principle of an open society – equal access to the political process as a voter and as a candidate.

Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

*

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 00:23 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Except the Tea Party movement existed long before any billionaires got on board, and even then is so decentralized that I'm sure the individual groups would love to see some of that cash come in so they could get some work done.

Seriously, man.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 00:25 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Yes, in 2008, after Bush did something intended to help people for a change. They were nowhere in 2007 or earlier when he was engaging in essentially the Wilson Administration, if a cruder and stupider version of it, complete with hypocritical and pecunarically motivated idealistic foreign policy disasters abroad and thuggery at home.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 00:27 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Considering the Tea Party movement is primarily about economics and government spending, your complaint about the Tea Party seems to be "it's not about what I want it to be about." Hardly a really solid criticism.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 00:30 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Yes, budget deficits healed by ending gay rights, banning abortion and legalizing murder of abortionists, demanding birth certificates to register for President, and claiming still that preserving the Holy Burlington Coat Factory will all magically make the economy paradisical and shrink the budget. I'd have better luck trying gris-gris for the same result.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 00:33 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
The Tea Party folks aren't really driving the bus on those, as I'm sure you're aware. Even assuming that your take on them is remotely accurate.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 00:36 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Yes, the Tea Partiers never support what the Tea Party and Republican delegates they elect actually do, you're right. Except when they keep donating to them and re-electing them.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:00 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
You say "keep" as if they've had multiple opportunities.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:35 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
2008 and 2010 aren't multiple opportunities? Unless you mean after all that there has in fact only been one and that the Tea Party was an artificial auxiliary to the Republican Party.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:46 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
The Tea Party movement wasn't really involved in the 2008 campaign outside of Ron Paul's folks. It didn't really take off until early 2009.. At no time has it been an "artificial auxiliary" to anything.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:49 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Interesting, isn't it, that they don't object to a dumber, cruder Wilson Administration but do discover their voice just as a black Democrat is elected? I daresay that the dogs that do not bark in the night-time are more interesting than the ones which do.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:53 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
It's not the least bit surprising that they were not bothered by modest deficit, but were very bothered by significant deficit spending by Bush and then seeing Obama double down on it.

The race baiting is stale.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:56 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Where were the McCain Tea Party Birthers? When the FOX channel wasn't consider McCain the Democratic Nominee from Arizona, that is? Where were the crowds protesting that McCain was not a US citizen? Nowhere. But all the signs about "lying Africans" are present, and a sign that as in the days of Israel and Judah people return to their lies like a dog returning to its puke.

But not in the least concerned about the government deciding it could listen to anyone's phone calls it damn well pleased to with no reason at all, or the suspension of Habeas Corpus without a national emergency or insurrection, or the end of the Posse Comitatus Act. They don't give a damn about abuse of government power. They just give a damn about *Democrats* doing what they were quite fine with 2 years ago.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 01:58 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Where were the McCain Tea Party Birthers? When the FOX channel wasn't consider McCain the Democratic Nominee from Arizona, that is? Where were the crowds protesting that McCain was not a US citizen? Nowhere. But all the signs about "lying Africans" are present, and a sign that as in the days of Israel and Judah people return to their lies like a dog returning to its puke.

I linked this to you elsewhere.

They don't give a damn about abuse of government power. They just give a damn about *Democrats* doing what they were quite fine with 2 years ago.

They're concerned with economics. Fucking hell, man, read what you're replying to.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 02:00 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
You linked to a constitutional law scholar, not to the likes of Senator David Vitter. Where were the Tea Partiers against electing McCain because he might not be a US citizen? Are they a non-partisan grass-roots movement or are they not?

Yes, they're so concerned about it that they ban abortion and revive Sodomy Laws. Perfectly designed to reduce deficits, that is. I can just see how a government small enough to fit in the uterus and the bedroom will purge the country of things like 100 million dollar toilet seats.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 02:01 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
As those things cost the federal government money, you shouldn't be surprised. Unless, of course, you fundamentally misunderstand the movement. Which, in that case, means that you'll constantly be surprised.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 02:04 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
Given that those things are the three biggest chunks of the Federal budget but are the sacred cows not to be harmed lest the wrath of Ahura Market be drawn upon the Tea Party.....but I forget, you sincerely believe that Tea Party representatives in the states and the Federal Congress aren't really the "Tea Party" and are unable to ever provide specifics, or even to show that in fact you know what this mythical "Tea Party" is about.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 02:09 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Which is why Paul Ryan is leading the charge on reform. (http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/)

Which is why the movement has said the military can't be exempt (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/23/politics/main7274710.shtml). Why Tea Party Congresspeople helped kill the F-35 engine (http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/144349-tea-party-freshmen-on-spot-over-funding-for-jet-engine).

You have no clue what you're talking about right now. None whatsoever.

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 02:11 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com
To a deafening silence from the rest of the Tea Party. He and Rand Paul, kooks though they are, are the only ones with sufficient Cojones to do that.

It said that to jeers and derision from Rupert Murdoch's news stations.

Yes, they killed the F-35 years after everyone else *but* them realized it was never going to be anything but a waste of funds. And as I remembered, the GOP was willing to shoot down the Democratic budget but promised their own sometime in the summer.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com - Date: 2/3/11 02:22 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com - Date: 2/3/11 02:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com - Date: 2/3/11 02:34 (UTC) - Expand

*sigh*

From: [identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - Date: 2/3/11 02:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: *sigh*

From: [identity profile] thies.livejournal.com - Date: 2/3/11 03:18 (UTC) - Expand

Re: *sigh*

From: [identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - Date: 2/3/11 03:29 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 14:51 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mrbogey.livejournal.com
Prior to WW2 there was no noticable radiation in Japan. Right after the war there was a significant radiological reading.

It's clear that surrendering must somehow cause nuclear fallout.

What's the Latin phrase for this again?

(no subject)

Date: 2/3/11 21:34 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Not the case here. I'm not saying that the Tea Party isn't also filled with some social conservatives, but that the Tea Party is not putting social issues forward. But, given how much you don't know about the Tea Party given your laughter at the concept of it being a grassroots movement, I'm not surprised you don't know that.

(no subject)

Date: 3/3/11 01:12 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kylinrouge.livejournal.com
Hey, if the Tea Party was in favor of cutting Defense spending, I'd be all for them.

There's a lot of them that get involved in non-economic issues, but if we're gonna play the game that real Tea Partiers are just fiscal conservatives then they've step up. They got some dudes in office, where are the proposals to cut Defense?

(no subject)

Date: 3/3/11 03:02 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
Hey, if the Tea Party was in favor of cutting Defense spending, I'd be all for them.

You're in luck (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/23/politics/main7274710.shtml).

(no subject)

Date: 3/3/11 23:24 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kylinrouge.livejournal.com
I mean actions, not words. If they put it to a vote and vote to make those cuts then that'll mean something. Lying isn't exactly new, you know.

(no subject)

Date: 3/3/11 23:31 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
So, like, the F-35.

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods


MONTHLY TOPIC:

Failed States

DAILY QUOTE:
"Someone's selling Greenland now?" (asthfghl)
"Yes get your bids in quick!" (oportet)
"Let me get my Bid Coins and I'll be there in a minute." (asthfghl)

June 2025

M T W T F S S
       1
2 34 5 678
910 1112 131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30