Tea Tantrum Indeed: The right-wing populists have officially taken over movement conservatism
By David Neiwert Thursday Apr 16, 2009 1:00pm
Now that the Right has had its little Tea Tantrum, will we hear from them again? Michelle Malkin and all the progenitors of the Tantrums assured us that they were "here to stay," but it's hard to figure out exactly what they're going to do next.
Will the Tea Tantrums just fade like a three-year-old's when you just let her throw it and ignore her? One can't help suspect.
Still, watching yesterday's daylong Tea Party Propagandafest on Fox News -- through Neil Cavuto and Glenn Beck and finally finishing with Sean Hannity, one thing was perfectly clear: this was right-wing populism in action -- indeed, in the process of taking the reins of the leaderless conservative movement.
There was a lot of talk throughout the day about how "this wasn't about Republicans and Democrats," this was about "the people vs. politicians," "right and wrong," "socialism vs. capitalism," etc. etc. There was also a lot of talk about those parasites who feed off the producers. There were the "Atlas Is Shrugging" and "Ayn Rand Was Right" signs at all the rallies.
It's all populism -- and despite the token Democrats they trotted out from time to time, it was distinctly right-wing populism.
And they are clearly leading the conservative movement now. Indeed, Fox's broadcast itself was a clear signal of the movement's embrace of its populist wing.
A giveaway moment came during Hannity's evening broadcast from Atlanta, when he brought in a live feed from the Rick and Bubba Tea Tantrum in Alabama:
Hannity: And I'm going to tell you one other thing: When did we ever get to a point in America where, we're nearly at the point where fifty percent of Americans don't pay anything in taxes! Nothing!
[Crowd boos]
Rick: The numbers out are just astounding that, that, how much that the very top taxpayers actually pay. I feel like these taxpayers are disenfranchised. I want them to have a share of the burden just like they have a share of the vote.
That's right -- it's the wealthy top percentage of the country that needs a tax break. After all, they are the one Obama's targeting, right? So at least they're being upfront about just who "the taxpayers" are whose interests they're out marching to defend.
That brings to mind David Horsey's cartoon in this morning's Online P-I:
This is a phenomenon known as Producerism, which is a hallmark of right-wing populism. It's defined as:
a syncretic ideology of populist economic nationalism which holds that the productive forces of society - the ordinary worker, the small businessman, and the entrepreneur, are being held back by parasitical elements at both the top and bottom of the social structure.
... Producerism sees society's strength being "drained from both ends"--from the top by the machinations of globalized financial capital and the large, politically connected corporations which together conspire to restrict free enterprise, avoid taxes and destroy the fortunes of the honest businessman, and from the bottom by members of the underclass and illegal immigrants whose reliance on welfare and government benefits drains the strength of the nation. Consequently, nativist rhetoric is central to modern Producerism (Kazin, Berlet & Lyons). Illegal immigrants are viewed as a threat to the prosperity of the middle class, a drain on social services, and as a vanguard of globalization that threatens to destroy national identities and sovereignty. Some advocates of producerism go further, taking a similar position on legal immigration.
In the United States, Producerists are distrustful of both major political parties. The Republican Party is rejected for its support of corrupt Big Business and the Democratic Party for its advocacy of the unproductive lazy waiting for their entitlement handouts (Kazin, Stock, Berlet & Lyons).
Chip Berlet has written extensively about the long historical association of producerism with oppressive right-wing movements and regimes.
It is, in essence, predicated on the psychology of celebrity-worship: convincing working-class schlubs that they too can someday become rich and famous too -- because when they do, would they want to be taxed heavily? It's all about dangling that lottery carrot out there for the poor stiffs who were never any good at math to begin with.
And with right-wing populism, it's the wealthy who stand to benefit, which is why they so willingly underwrite it. This is why Henry Ford -- the ultimate enabler of fascism -- is such a seminal figure for American right-wing populists. It's also why Ayn Rand and Atlas Wanked are so important in their mythology.
It might, in fact, more accurately be called "sucker populism."
We certainly saw an upsurge in right-wing populism in Republican ranks in the 2008 campaign, reflected both by Sarah "Evita" Palin's unmistakable right-wing populism, as well as Ron Paul's insurgency (there were a lot of Ron Paul supporters at these Tea Tantrums). There's been Glenn Beck's soaring popularity -- during which time, you'll also recall, he eagerly defended the AIG bonuses. And now the Tantrums.
I doubt that either Palin or Paul have the actual political wherewithal to surge to the fore of the Republican Party as the chief of its populist wing (neither were particularly visible at the Tantrums). More likely, a corporate Republican who's good at faking the populism -- like Newt Gingrich or Mike Huckaby -- will claim the mantle.
It will be entertaining to watch, but it almost certainly won't be fun.
Login or Register to post comments.
All this time I've been worried that the SWAT teams and detention centers that Halliburton is building would be coming for the Left...but I wonder now if it will be all the Right Wing freakos who get corralled into cages and zapped for their troubles, en masse. If so, I'll be presented with a dilemma. I don't care for the idea of this happening, of seeing the police state grow...but...then again, it would be so tasty to see it happen. Hunh.
is what I think you mean, nezua, by tasty. A topsy-turvey turn of events in a surrealistic world where red neck protesters are gassed and beaten by crowd controlling, baton swinging, tear gas shooting police forces, for yelling such things as down with the government and secession!
That would be delicious indeed!
Trouble is, is do you start carding anyone that looks suspicious, looks like....them as they are rounded up. What were the common characteristics of those wackos in their tea parties, for a start?
By the way, ¿que tál?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWkZ_StRjU0
Nailed it.
.
Oh yeah, lefties who fall for populist messages certainly aren't suckers. That's a fact. No suckers on the left, only on the right.
...you belong to a cult. A cult whose leaders include the likes of Shammity, Limpbaugh, and others. You refuse to hear the entire story even if what you believe is just flat wrong.. (See the Reagan and Taxes).
WTF are you talking about? You assume a lot there, sooner.
Yeah, big Hannity and Limbaugh fan here. You got me.
You're just a big whiny diaper baby that's all.
Damn, you must also post at Think Progress. All they can do over there is call people names.
This from someone with a homophobic nickname.
No contest.
... but I don't think you really know who you're dealing with.
busted, wheyghey!
screw it.
Anybody who accepts the "citizen" label belongs to a cult.
However, when Joe the Shmo complains of taxing the wealthy in between getting paid by the hour, Joe is voting and protesting against his own economic interest. I suppose the same would be true about all those billionaires advocating communism, but I've never heard of one of those actually existing.
History of maximum U.S.income tax rates:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_th...
I'll help you out here, sparky.
Top income tax rate 1944-45: 94%
Top income tax rate 1952-53: 92%
Figure it out if you are able.
Got google?
Damn, some of you people really are living on a different planet.
I'm merely pointing out that "Sucker Populism" is not limited to the right wing (whatever that is).
Then you start babbling about tax rates as some sort of retort? uh... yeah...
I'm pointing out that the Fleabaggers' original gripe was supposed to be high taxes.
Try to keep up.
Which had nothing to do with my comment.
Pay attention and read for comprehension.
Thu, 04/16/2009 - 14:46 — wheyghey
Oh yeah, lefties who fall for populist messages certainly aren't suckers. That's a fact. No suckers on the left, only on the right.
---------------
To what "populist message" were you referring on the right?
And here's the post that I replied to:
The OP was saying that right wing populism is better described as sucker populism. And my reply to that is that suckers are not limited to the so-called right wing. There are plenty of suckers on the so-called left that get swept up into populist movements.
I mean, during the election there were people that believed that Obama was going to bring peace to the world and that everything would be rosy if we just elected him. These people are useful idiots. They were just as useful to the establishment as the pro-Bush morons that got swept up into that populist/nationalist inanity.
but Obama can't fix 8 years of Shrub fuck-ups in a few months.
As for the "people that believed that Obama was going to bring peace to the world and that everything would be rosy", I haven't met or heard of them before. Perhaps you could name these crazies.
Perhaps it's your fantasies about people like that which are crazy.
Here is a prime example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8lXEY8O0tQ
"I don't have to worry about putting gas in my car. I don't have to worry about my mortgage. If I helped him, he's going to help me."
Come on, lady. He's a politician. Don't be a sucker.
were "world peace" and "rosy".
Try harder.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/...
He's one of us. Please.
Maybe you have the Obama bumper sticker with the O as a peace symbol. But then forget about the plans for escalation in Afghanistan or picking off tribesman a dozen at a time from drones in Pakistan.
http://arabwritersgroup.wordpress.com/2009/03...
World Peace is Possible with Obama in the White House
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2008/1...
Man, is that some grade A sycophancy or what?
This guy is going to change the world! Everything will be different because Obama is president and the Democrats will be in control!
Total suckers.
And for millions of adult citizens and fellow human beings across the globe, some sense of sanity, dignity, and integrity have returned to the Oval Office.
--------------
I can see how such a concept bothers you, or is it just that it was published in that commie rag USNews?
Oh, and I haven't had a bumpersticker on any of my vehicles since I endorsed Eugene McCarthy. Too many wingnuts out there.I'm sure you know what I mean.
Still no "rosy" or "world peace" quotes, huh? Just an old lady pumping gas and something from USNews.
So sad.
is that you?
wheyguy, or wheyghey, or whatever, you come off pretty close!
the top marginal tax rate was higher, but in 44-45 it effected income of 400k and up and in 52-53 it was 200k which is how much in todays dollars? About 5 million for 1944 and 1.5 or so for 1952. Which taxing 2008 income at the same rate and margins would of been like taxing people 90+% in 1954 for income of 25k.
The word is "affected", not "effected". Learn the freaking difference.
False comparison. Populism has its place but this teabag shit is just that, shit.
The elites sponsored this tea bag BS. They demagogued this whole tax issue for the filthy rich's benefit. The working stiffs buy into their tricks because they talk "values" but then turn around and stab them in the back by making this country a land of us and them, the stinking rich and everyone else "right" or left.
Here's Arianna's little blurb (from over at HuffPo)-- FUNNY.
more like veiled racism.
They were pea brains to begin with but since Obama became President the Right wing nuts have collectively lost their friggin minds , they are a genuine comedy act now .
These people aren't doing anything differently than they've done in the past. It's just that now that Obama has been elected, the MSM (and party-run blogs like this one) have begun shining light on them and saying "this is all a reaction to Obama," when in reality a lot of the right wing fringe were totally anti-Bush. I know. It's hard to believe because you weren't watching during that time. But now, it's convenient to cover their activities and keep it all in the D vs. R paradigm.
Pampers are available at your nearest Walgreens. Buy some for your next Tea Tantrum.
"when in reality a lot of the right wing fringe were totally anti-Bush."
Are they the ones we saw cheering on Sarah Palin? Um... okay, if you say so.
Are you frigging serious... you're still spouting out that old meme?
IT IS A REACTION TO OBAMA! (all caps for added emphasis)
Where was the right-wing fringe (if there is such a thing) when Bush was using the Constitution to wipe Cheney's ass?
The problem with that contention (right-wing fringe were totally anti-Bush) is that there was nothing to show for it from the beginning. I never saw any anti-Bush signs at the tea parties. Face it, the Tea Party was set up by sore losers who can't stand to see a African American (don't know if there's a more appropriate description) as the public face of this country around the world and in the White House.
To quote... "Go sell crazy somewhere else, we're all stocked up here."
For some reason I can't explain, I ventured over to the FoxNation site and looked at comments about an article Paul Krugman wrote (False Tea Parties). The caliber, tone, stupidity and scariness of the majority of comments truely depressed me. These people are for real, and they're out there, and they're mad as hell over what they hear at Fox News. If I were the President, I'd have a suit made of armor and secret service guys. Not kidding - they're mad, scared, armed and ignorant of even the most basic realities. HELP!!
...not the rule. That's the crowd that Shammity plays too. It really is no different than Jerry Springer (as someone wrote in an earlier post).
It is amazing how these people are. "..if you don't think or govern as I do, then I'm going to threaten your right to exist..". Thing, right wingers who believe that way need to konw is this.....I shoot back!
What makes this movement such a sham is the timing. Where were these people during the Bush years?
To quote the radio DJ in the video: "it is time for a change and time for a revolution". Where has this guy been living? We just had it and it was not to the right. Cutting taxes and smaller government would not be a change, in fact it would be exactly more the of same. These people have absolutely no clue what they are talking about. End of the day these are just a bunch of loser who lost the last election and they cannot take it! They are undemocratic! They are the facists!
...to scream like morons on cue just like that. Listen to the bigot at 3:58 yelling "kill Obama!" After two months of Obama, it's time for change. Unreal.
the "kill Obama" guy at 3:58. I missed it the first time around.
The mainstream media needs to pick up on that outburst and hammer Hannity and all the other right-wing tea-bag promoting media clowns mercilessly with it.
This kind of rhetoric needs to be stopped before somebody gets hurt.
As the old saying goes; "its all fun and games until someone gets poked in the eye with a tea-bag".
I think Janeane Garofalo nailed it on Countdown last night: This is nothing more than thinly veiled racism.
The Right is definitely playing with fire here. But, of course, when someone does take their rhetoric too far and people wind up getting hurt or dying as a result they go into Marie Barone mode, act surprised, and say, "What? Don't look at me!"
He said "kill Obama" you are the one who injected racism into that quote. Bigot is used quite loosely by people who have no other argument than racism. Or am i missing something?
So, taking you at your word, supposing that guy was not a racist, and he just wanted to "Kill Obama" because of the policies he's enacting, then it's OK to kill a democratically elected leader if you disagree with him?
Yeah, real moral of you.
This is what the Tea Parties represent. Remember, as Democrats you once believed what Buchanan writes. Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic party as the Republican party -- the party of limited government.
Speech made by Pat Buchanan to the Boston World Affairs Council in Boston, Massachusetts, on January 6th 2000:
Fight Back
In 1939, in his book The New World Order, H. G. Wells wrote: "Countless people will hate the New World Order... and will die protesting against it... we will have to bear in mind the distress of a generation of malcontents..."
Well, Mr Wells, we are your malcontents. But we're not going to die protesting your New World Order; we're going to live fighting it. And Seattle may just prove to be the Boston Tea Party of that New World Order. "I believe globalism is inevitable," Mr Clinton told Larry King at last year's end. Well I don't!
My vision of America is of a republic that has recovered every trace of her lost sovereignty, independence and liberty, a nation that is once again self-reliant in agriculture, in industry and technology, a country that can, if need be, stand alone in the world.
My vision is of a republic, not an empire, a nation that does not go to war unless it is attacked, or her vital interests are imperilled, or her honour is impugned. And when she does go to war it is only after following a constitutional declaration by the Congress of the United States. We are not imperialists; we are not interventionists; we are not hegemonists; and we are not isolationists. We simply believe in America first, last and always.
And we don't want to be citizens of the world, because we have been granted a higher honour - we are citizens of the United States. Asked on his deathbed to make a toast, John Adams, the great Bostonian, declared: "That is my vision for America; that is our cause; and it shall prevail!
You mean sedition John?
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/01/1-the...
I don't like John Adams much, nor Buchanan. But it was a good speech.
BTW, did you know that the Alien & Sedition Acts specifically targeted the American Jacobins?
Did you know several newspapers on the east coast called Thomas Jefferson a Jacobin and referred to the original Democratic party as the Jacobin party?
http://www.sidis.net/TSChap29.htm
This guy you should really like iffin yer into that shit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_Open_Conspiracy.22_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Conspiracy (1928 by HG Wells)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_integration (1961 by economist Bela Balassa)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Recovery_Program (1947 The Marshall Plan)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_(centrism) (Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Rahm Emmanuel)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society (HG Wells, Tony Blair)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Keynesian_resurgence
here's another one for ya:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_th...
who wrote speeches for Richard Nixon, the only US president to resign in disgrace? That Pat Buchanan?
Perhaps you could tell us then, did he write the speech in which Nixon says, "I am not a crook" ?
That was a doozey all right, and something to be proud of.
"Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic party as the Republican party -- the party of limited government.".
I don't agree with everything Jefferson did. He got a lot right, but not everything (slaves, limited government).
In today's complex world, we need complex government, not limited government. Limited government worked 225 years ago.
"And we don't want to be citizens of the world, because we have been granted a higher honour - we are citizens of the United States."
If more people considered themselves citizens of the world, and not solely citizens of their country, the world would probably be a better place. Who cares what John Adams thought? That was before nuclear weapons could extinct this species.
The vision of the founding fathers (a simple country which is self reliant) is superseded by world events. I'm not exactly a fan of globalization either, but it's reality for now.
Bill Hicks said of his being an American, "yeah, my parents fucked there. So what?"
I'd love to see one of those tea-bagging cretins elaborate on the content of the signs they were holding up.
You know, I really don't understand the right wing at all. All of the people they take their cues from, Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly...are all freaking millionaires.
Don't they get this!
..that all of the attention the teabag parties were getting would just encourage more "protests" and I still think that's true. However, the behavior, signs, etc. of these cretins makes me think that the overall effect these gatherings have will be to further isolate the 28%ers. I think the great majority of Americans will not want to be associated with these folks in any way, shape or form.
Here's to a permanent repuglican minority!
"I want them to have share of the burden just like they have a share of the vote. "
What kind of 'tax protest' openly calls for taxing even more people? Answer: one that's been hijacked by the NeoCons.
Read Neo-Conned Again: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archive...
simply amazing.
Exactly.
... by passing the buck
"Hannity: And I'm going to tell you one other thing: When did we ever get to a point in America where, we're nearly at the point where fifty percent of Americans don't pay anything in taxes! Nothing!
[Crowd boos]"
WTF? You guys don't even make any sense!
I thought they were protesting taxes that were too high.
Why are they booing that some people pay no taxes?
Who are they booing? Who is Sean Hannity talking about?
1. Some people are so poor they don't have to pay any income taxes - however, they do pay sales taxes. Do they want these people to start paying income taxes?
2. Some people are so rich they can hide their money in offshore bank accounts, tax havens, Swiss bank accounts, and reduce the taxes they pay. Do they want these people to give up their tax havens?
3. Some corporations get away with paying $0 in taxes too. Are they booing them?
It seems more of a pavlovian response to anything hannity says - hannity makes a point in a breathless dramatic matter, and the people boo on cue.
Now I am totally fu*king confused. What the hell were they protesting for and against? Less taxes for the wealthy? More taxes for the wealthy? Less govt. spending? WTF was it all about?
I doubt you would get a coherent response if you asked a hundred of them. But deep down they know exactly what they were protesting against - a black president.
...Thank you for posting the truth.
Not sure it would make much difference to most of those people if the president was black or white. What matters most is that he's a Democrat. If we had a black Republican president (I know, it would never happen), they wouldn't be out in the streets. If we had a white Democratic president, they'd still be doing this.
....look at how they have treated Steele...
I was going to respond with something like, "Can you blame them? The guy is a moron?" Then I remembered that conservatives LOVE morons (Palin, Bush, Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly, etc.). I guess you've got a point.
That seems to be the factual bottom line. I saw too many signs and posters equating our President to Hitler too. The tax BS was all a a fu*king facade.
Let Radley Balko explain it to you.
http://www.theagitator.com/2009/04/14/teabagg...
The anti-war protesters six years ago numbered into the millions worldwide and into the tens of thousands up past 150,000 in the U.S. They also received almost exactly zero media attention.
How does that compare to an astro-turf "movement" numbering in the hundreds and receiving all day coverage?
Had it not been for C-span, we would have had only a glimpse of the large war protest.
Who is Cindy Sheehan? I have no idea because the media never covered that sort of thing.
... and her protests occurred long after the ones I referenced.
In Chicago, for example, tens of thousands protested during the run-up to the war. We shut Lake Shore Drive down. But all that made the news (and even then, only local news) was that a few wackos protested on LSD. I think that it was in the traffic report.
I dunno. I remember plenty of coverage of the big ones in the big cities in late 2002 and early 2003.
Maybe it was because the coverage was sandwiched in between all the pro-war propaganda being put out by the main cable news networks at the time.
That was still during the time when the media was in its pants shitting phase about "them danged Muslims" and terrorism color codes.
So, I guess you're right.
Some of these people are so ignorant, they're easily convinced that these problems didn't get really big until Obama took office... less than three months ago!
..You do notice the abscence of "flavor" at these protest....if you know what I mean.
Again, the tax thing is a cover for a lot of them on the REAL reason they are protesting.
Is it anti-immigration, or anti-illegal immagration?
it's both.
Thats a big stretch and unfair and not true.
Cry us a river.
The C&L attack dog.
should have nothing to fear from a dog.
There is very little else to take away from this except that of course FOX is without shame.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/04/tea_pa...
and
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/04...
You probably won't like the sites, but it expllains whats going on from a different view.
are afoot. Now that their tantrums are over.
Unfortunately for you and your movement Moose, is the fact that you decide to implement these protest now.
None of you decried Bush and the Republican majority for running up deficits, borrowing large sums of money for foreign governments..etc..etc....generational theft..etc..etc.
You guys have ZERO credibility on fiscal responsibility.
You obviosly didn't read the articles so I'll ignore this "None of you decried Bush and the Republican majority for running up deficits, borrowing large sums of money for foreign governments..etc..etc....generational theft..etc..etc."
"Unfortunately for you and your movement Moose"
And why is it my movement?
I read both of them. Perhaps you'd like point out where the explanation is for the silence during the Bush years, because I sure didn't see it. The first guy pretends Bush never existed. Never even alludes to him or the Republican congress that exploded spending, the debt, and the size of government.
So you're against growing the government? Good.
Government doesn't need to be any bigger, it needs to be more effective. And by that I mean more effective at doing the people's work, not the work of the rich and powerful.
I skimmed them. I can only take so much of "Obama likes to kill babies" before I barf..
I saw something in them about Abortion, and bowing to the Saudi King.
The second one asked the question of "why media matters and such.." are trying to stifle the voices of the teaparties.
It's your movement as you are on a liberal blog defending it.
Again, if these tea party movements had started several years ago, they would have more credibility.
I scrolled through 24 picks of the tea protest and saw about 4 anti-Obama signs and one anti-Bush sign. The anti-Obama stuff is good, in my opinion, as it exposes the movement for what it really is....
50% of Americans don't pay taxes?????? What the heck is wrong with these people? Where do they get this crap? Are they perhaps including children, who don't pay taxes, and therefore maybe it makes sense that 50% of the American population does not pay taxes?
I'm sick of this crap of these idiots defending the wealthiest Americans. These wealthiest few also have a lower overall tax rate than most Americans. The reason for this is several, including deductions they can take, and including the fact that they stop paying into social security once they make more than $106,800 this year. A couple of years ago, Warren Buffet said that it was unfair that his secretary pays far higher percentage-wise in taxes than he does.
Further, capital gains for the highest wage earners is only 15%. That is on money that is in effect just sitting there and growing (if the market is good), with the wage owner not actually "working" for that money. Typically, it is the wealthy who have to worry about capital gains taxes anyway.
When I worked in Europe, my perks were such that I was in the highest income tax bracket. I could give a rat's ass if I paid 36% or 39% in federal income tax. Those who do give a rat's ass are simply selfish and greedy.
This is sickening. They're nothing but greedy bastards.
Jack.
I've been plenty angry in my lifetime at how my tax money is spent, so that part of it I understand. If you and I make an investment in our country through our taxes, that money should be treated with the greatest respect and not wasted and given away to people and corporations (and military boondoggles) that don't need it.
The difference is that conservatives don't want to pay taxes for any reason, even for the public good, though they seem to be okay with paying just enough that it can be flushed down the toilet in the form of scandalous wars, phony Star Wars weapons defense systems, and weapons of mass destruction so we can bully the rest of the world.
Just how completely stupid and brainwashed can all these Reslugs be to want the top 1% of the rich to get the tax breaks and them and the middle class none??
...I work with several. They were over at their workstations a couple of weeks ago mocking Obama's tax cuts FOR THEM. One even has a very large family and I'm sure he could benefit from them but, he's so brainwashed by tuning in daily to conservative radio, he has lost all ability to think for himself.
It's sad really.
I'm just hoping, with all this yelling of "fire" in a crowded theater by leading voices on the right, that Obama can survive long enough to see the economy well into a rebound.
I want ta meat you! Tell me wear you are and we go mano mano! Dat wl teach you dumb bat liberal a lessun!
When Texas secedes it could snowball from there. The conservatives will have what they want then. No unemployment, no taxes; an all white Utopia. Anyone that loses their job will be ground up for food.
they're all white
kin creeate jobs!
Where's Minnie Pearl?
a good portion of these people bought their tea bags with an unemployment check
Just had Mayor Virg Benero on, this guy has to get out there and kick some ass, he can out shout them every time.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090309/lansing...
The Iea Tantrum numbered in the HUNDREDS(!!!) Oh, my.
They held it at the Market House Square, where once slaves were sold. I was working my blue collar job so I couldn't snap any ironic pics.
The local radio clowns are claiming that the hundreds (out of 150,000, not counting the military base) is a significant.
The Tantrums are just a "Keeper of The Flame" front for real fascists.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034936/
... is the line that says "Producerism is the hallmark of right-wing populism." It certainly wasn't a right-wing phenomenon that defined the Populist Party back in the 1890s. It was very left-wing, especially compared to the laissez-faire, Social Darwinist businessmen who controlled the Republican party. As far as I know, the Populist platform in 1892 was the first time "producerism" was defined as such, and was very definitely associated with (agricultural) labor.
Honestly, these are THEIR pics, and look at the spelling of some of these dumb asses. Listen to this yokels. I'm disgusted with such losers having a microphone in front of their lunatic mouths.
God, these are some dumb ass holes. Shameful.
White trash bubba "It's the United States of America not the United States of England"
Yea, that's why the nutters want to secede because it' the "United States of America"
Is playing the nutters for fools. Millionaire Hannity is using the nutters who will get a tax cut under Obama to rile em up and con them into making sure he keeps his tax cuts under Bush while they continue to pay more.
You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can fool the nutters all of the time!
Idiots on display plain and simple.....minded. I'm embarrassed for them.
a clue that they've been had
As they say this is the "United States of America"
I definitely want my tax dollars to go to national security by keeping an eye on these nutters. The guvment needs to keep an eye on these lunatics before they hurt innocent Americans. Id wager the next Tim McVeigh is in that crowd some where and Hannity is doing his part to gin him up. The next shooting or bombing and Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity should be tried as accessories to murder. The treason trial can start anyday since they are openly calling for succession and revolution. No need to wait for that trial, let's get it underway.
Limbaugh and (former construction worker) Hannity in Horsey's cartoon remind me of The Walrus and the Carpenter. Here are the last 3 verses:
"It seems a shame," the Walrus said,
"To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!"
The Carpenter said nothing but
"The butter's spread too thick!"
"I weep for you," the Walrus said:
"I deeply sympathize."
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
"O Oysters," said the Carpenter,
"You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none--
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.
It would be nice if someone would explain to these people, that this
top percent paying all the taxes ( big business ) receives the most aid when you consider that our HUGE military/defense budgets
set-up around the world, that are needed to protect American interests (big business).
Last time I checked the majority of working class Americans don't have business's needing aircraft carriers, military bases, tens of thousands of military personnel etc etc .. protecting their business
And rational people wonder why these people luv'd SARAH! I've said it before and I will say it again, there absolutely no thinking, rational, intelligent, reflective people left in the Republican party. It is made up entirely of idiots, homophobes, racists, anti-intellectuals, and irrational people. There's the saying; you can fool some of the people some of time, but not all of the people all of the time. If you narrow this statement down just to the Republican/Conservative party, the statement would read as follows; you can fool all of the idiots all of time, any day of the week, any hour of the day. My God, what the hell is going on with these morons. Hannity, Rush, O'Reilly, the insane Glenn Beck, All of Fox News, Rick Santelli and Lou Dobbs are just riding these yahoos right off the cliff with them. Say goodbye to what was formerly known as the Republican party. May it rest in peace, oops, well "hell" anyway.
"socialism vs. capitalism"
I wonder how many of the gullible people who went to these tea bag parties have had their credit card % rates raised TO 20% - 26% - 30%. How many of these impaired people have kids who have had their credit card rates raised. That is pure capitalism. Do they care? Do they want the government to step in and make the banks lower the rates?
Just curious.
they can put that fine a point on it. (In fact, I doubt they could identify the definition of socialism or capitalism in a multiple choice format. With only two choices!)
What's more, they certainly don't know a difference between a socialist and a fascist, as they alternate between the two in describing President Obama..
He's a fascist. Because he is. A fascist.
Yes, I know. I've heard that. But is he a fascist only on days when he's not being a socialist? Otherwise, isn't that something like being a reformed alcoholic and a wine taster at the same time?
Oh, wait a minute! Maybe they don't mean "fascist". Maybe they don't mean "socialist." Maybe, just maybe, what they mean to say is yucky.
is to encourage Texas to secede in hopes they'll give sanctuary to teabaggers from all 50 -- 49 -- states.
These Tea-baggers remind me of what happens to the victims of the parasitic wasp Ampulex compressa.
Here's what these wasps do.
When it's time for a female to lay an egg, she finds a cockroach to make her egg's host, then proceeds to deliver two precise stings.
The first she delivers to the roach's mid-section, causing its front legs to buckle. The brief paralysis caused by the first sting gives the wasp the luxury of time to deliver a more precise sting to the head. The wasp slips her stinger through the roach's exoskeleton and directly into its brain. She probes the roach's brain until she reaches one particular spot that appears to control the escape reflex. She then injects a second venom that influences the cockroach in such a way that it's escape reflex disappears.
From the outside, the effect is surreal. The wasp does not paralyze the cockroach. In fact, the roach is able to lift up its front legs again and walk. But now it cannot move of its own accord. The wasp takes hold of one of the roach's antennae and leads it like a dog on a leash.
The zombie roach crawls where its master leads, which turns out to be the wasp's burrow. The roach creeps obediently into the burrow and sits there quietly, while the wasp plugs up the burrow with pebbles. Now the wasp turns to the roach once more and lays an egg on its underside. The roach does not resist. The egg hatches, and the larva chews a hole in the side of the roach. Then in it goes.
The larva grows inside the roach, devouring the organs of its host, for about eight days. It is then ready to weave itself a cocoon--which it makes within the roach as well. After four more weeks, the wasp grows to an adult. It breaks out of its cocoon, and out of the roach as well. Seeing a full-grown wasp crawl out of a cockroach suddenly makes those Alien movies look pretty derivative.
Ampulex does not want to kill these cockroaches. It doesn't even want to paralyze them the way spiders and snakes do, since it is too small to drag a big paralyzed roach into its burrow. So instead it just delicately retools the roach's neural network to take away its
motivation for self-defence. The wasp venom also somehow puts the roaches into suspended animation while keeping them in good health, even as a wasp larva is devouring it from the inside.
http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2006/02/02/the_w...
Perhaps we should re-name these clueless tea-baggers, 'Zombie Roaches' instead.
I think that's the first time I've ever felt sorry for a roach. But it's a really great comparison.
Art tends to imitate life.
Speaking as an outsider (from Australia), it seems to me that Fox 'News' and friends are master bullshit ARTists, who don't give a damn about anyone else besides themselves. It seems to me that
they are the 'grown-up' equivalent of schoolyard bullies
Perhaps America needs to enact some kind of anti-bullying laws?
My fourteen year old daughter finally figured out why these wingnuts are calling President Obama a socialist: You cant say n*gger on TV.
and that from a child. That's an adult view of child-like adults...from a child.
This was implied in a prior posting on the topic and it took a child to articulate it. Great job.
► [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNZS9ZuZcrg ]
Amended: Chanting... ♫♪ FOX-NEWS-SUCKS ♫♪
As somebody commented on another post:
That's it in a nutshell!
Thousands of people showing up at numerous rallies all accross the country is not a tantrum, it is a warning, and it had better be heeded.
Or what?
That's what I want to know. I keep hearing that we better heed them. Well, what if we ignore them? What if we forge ahead, get the country back on its feet, and prove their sorry asses wrong once again?
What are they going to do then?
Thanks for posting Horsey's cartoon from the PI. I hoped you would.
I found this linked at Kos. I don't think this is what the producers (fox) had in mind when they said these tea parties would be bi-partisan. Oops, somebody let Reality come to the party!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkOwsIIIe5I&eu...
worry about such a large concentration of stupid people being in one place at the same time.
Aha, I see
When liberals organize it's a "protest."
When conservatives do it it's a "tantrum."
Call me crazy, I thought it was more like... "democracy."
If you think the average American stands unaffected by these policies then you're a fool. You discount these people as sycophants for the rich but the truth is that they simply disagree with what our government is doing.
Compelling arguments have been made by people much more intelligent than any of you (or myself) for the catastrophic effect that policies like Obama's can have on an economy. Rather than discounting them outright you may want to read up on what your opponents believe.
By writing off your opponents so quickly, and without even considering their points at all, you have not proven your superiority as you seem to think, simply a predilection for willful ignorance.
Yes, Bush may have created these problems, but that doesn't mean that Obama is making them better.
I love when liberals defend Obama by saying, "Bush engaged in deficit spending too."
Ah, so Obama is spending like Bush? Now it's a good thing though, after all, Obama is a liberal so it's okay.
How about this. Bush was an idiot for doing it and Obama is too. That makes a lot more sense to me.
You think these people are stupid because they disagree with your president's policies. It never even occurs to you that Obama might be wrong. This kind of blind faith is what got us in to trouble with Bush in the first place.
It's easy to be critical of the 'other' guy. If every one would just think critically about 'their' guy then we wouldn't even be in this position.
when you are acting because someone (FOX 'News') has told you to. Where were these morons when GWB was running up the bill? Michael Moore mentioned this in Fahrenheit 9/11, and all you and these haters could do was point laugh and call him fat. Where the fuck were you fucktards then?
I love it when non liberals bitch about Obama's actions over the last 90 days, after keeping stum during the causal stages of this catastrofuck. Then say "Well it's Obama's fault now" with no clear idea how it happened.
I know they're stupid because they haven't got the slightest idea what Obama's policies are, and they think it's his fault that we're in this trouble. You idiots are bitching about cops, firefighters and teachers lay offs, as well as crumbling infrastructure on one hand, and wanting no taxes on the other.
I know they're stupid because these halfwits want their ipods, their big screen teevees, their 5000 sq foot homes their 3 $70k + cars, smooth roads, Fulbright scholars teaching the kids, instant cop/fire/med response, bridges and tunnels, hospital, mass transit (for the hoi polloi, of course) and they don't want to pay for it. Apparently, it's supposed to be free, but it's not socialism when they want it.
What's their alternative? Nothing. Nothing that fits in the realm of physics and math...
You accuse them of having no understanding of Obamas policies but you seem to have no understanding of their complaints.
You are classifying their argument according to your own terms and then (predictably) defeating your straw man.
It's a joke.
When liberals organize it's a "protest."
When conservatives do it it's a "tantrum."
Call me crazy, I thought it was more like... "democracy."
Who is classifying whose argument into whose terms here?
By the way, your premise is off base. Despite the fact it takes you, how many words to say "spending" makes them equals, its a matter of on what the government is spending its monetary resources.
Bush spent it by giving it in the form of tax breaks, ie. lower tax rates for the rich, sweetened with IRS regulations that allows them to deduct expenses only they could have, and do afford, being or course, rich. In other words, they get away with paying no taxes, or very little, in real terms.
Obama's spending, while not perfect, goes to government needs that very often mean workers. There is a loss in take in by the government because, most of us, 90 percent get our tax rates lowered. What's lost there comes from the rich who, after all, get rich on the backs of the middle-class.
Jokesters like you piss on yourselves. Jokes on you!
OK. You're crazy.
You're welcome.
Spending money you don't have is never a good idea. Doesn't matter if you're wasting it on a costly and pointless war like Bush or if you're "helping" the working class like Obama.
Printing billions out of thin air (that is where much the money is coming from mind you) devalues the currency for YOU.
What's worse, the big banks and corporations (you know, the ones that Obama voted along with the Republicans to bail out) get access to those funds before any one else; before the market adjusts. They get to spend it before inflation kicks in.
Sounds like a pretty good deal for corporate America to me.
It's as good as taking money out of your wallet. Except that this way you will cheer while they do it.
Also: Try not to use puerile insults. Whether or not I "piss on myself" is really none of your business and I fail to see what it has to do with the topic at hand.
How is this...you are all wet. You don't know what you are talking about. Talk about missing the point!
So then enlighten me, how exactly does inflationary spending help YOU?
and learn if its within your capabilities.
http://www.chrismartenson.com/category/tags/i...
We're careening towards a depression. Deficit spending *is* the solution. Is it the best solution? Probably not. But it's the only solution when NOBODY ELSE can or will spend. Depressions and recessions don't happen because the money evaporates. Rather, it stagnates - it stops moving.
Herbert Hoover tried to balance the federal books during an economic crash. We know what happened.
Now, whether you believe the New Deal, or WWII, or both, were the reason for the end of the Great Depression - it's irrelevant, because they each had one thing in common. In each case, the government leveraged it's credit (selling war bonds, etc) and spent a ton of money it essentially didn't have. When the country emerged from the war, we became prosperous enough to pay down much of this debt, without overly burdening the (hugely expanded) middle class with a giant tax increase.
Deficit spending seems to have worked, one way or another. the vast majority of economists would say the same, regardless of political persuasion.
Macro-economics works on different fundamentals than your household budget. I'd hope you were aware of that.
So, with that said - I don't suppose you have a reasonable alternative to deficit spending, do you? By reasonable, I mean of course, NOT what Hoover did.
Regards.
You don't have any idea what I understand
Edit: TIB
You ARE boring.
Hope you can get help for that. Recognising a problem is the first step...
that the majority of the "protesters" are not very bright, and don't really know enough about taxes, or much else for that matter to protest it effectively...the vast majority of the teabaggers are simply protesting Obama's presidency, because he's black.
And they're a bunch of whiny racist bitches...
And this so called protest was a MASSIVE failure.
The only thing they achieved, was proving to the world how truly ignorant they are.
he actually says
"I want them to have a share of the burden just like they wanted a share of the vote"
huh.
the old Calvinist mindset who feel if you had gotten rich it was Gods will and the pro slavery mindset which allows their corporate massahs to shit all over them.
In other words they are too ignorant to see that they are being taken advantage of because it IS Gods/Allahs will.
Kind of reminds me of the radical Muslim types, no wonder they hate each other so. They have no real understanding of each other.
Then there are the people who think that any one who is rich became that way by exploiting others. That it's impossible to earn your way in to the high tax brackets, and that luck and only luck accounts for any economic success one might garner.
In other words they are too ignorant to see that they are not being taking advantage of.
Login or Register to post comments.