Hmmm, Where Were The Teabaggers During the G20?

thoughtone

Rising Star
Registered
I thought the Teabaggers were against big government and lack of liberty? I guess as long as the corporations are running things it’s all cool (capitalists:lol::smh:). This explodes their racist, hypocritical intent. Fucking racists!
 
I thought the Teabaggers were against big government and lack of liberty? I guess as long as the corporations are running things it’s all cool (capitalists:lol::smh:). This explodes their racist, hypocritical intent. Fucking racists!

I wouldnt completely say racists. I would say they are Fucking Ignorant! That alone can imply racism as well as many other things.
 
Why didn't the mainstream media cover the violence at the G20 protests with such disgust as they did for the Tea Party protests? Why didn't the mainstream media blame Micheal Moore for the violence since his anti capitalist movie came out the day before?

Sorry buddy but capitalism isn't a problem. The govt growing in size while it doesn't have the funds to sustain it is. The G20 protests were full of anti capitalists and that is something the Tea Party is not.
 
Why didn't the mainstream media cover the violence at the G20 protests with such disgust as they did for the Tea Party protests? Why didn't the mainstream media blame Micheal Moore for the violence since his anti capitalist movie came out the day before?

Sorry buddy but capitalism isn't a problem. The govt growing in size while it doesn't have the funds to sustain it is. The G20 protests were full of anti capitalists and that is something the Tea Party is not.

Sorry buddy but capitalism isn't a problem. The govt growing in size while it doesn't have the funds to sustain it is.

I guess your right. The G20 is just a bunch of left wingers plotting to make the US government socialist.
 
Why didn't the mainstream media cover the violence at the G20 protests with such disgust as they did for the Tea Party protests? Why didn't the mainstream media blame Micheal Moore for the violence since his anti capitalist movie came out the day before?

Sorry buddy but capitalism isn't a problem. The govt growing in size while it doesn't have the funds to sustain it is. The G20 protests were full of anti capitalists and that is something the Tea Party is not.


Disgust?:lol:

Bring a loaded assault rifle to a presidential speech and get labeled a passionate American standing up for their second amendment rights. Protest multinational capitalist corporate domination of virtually every individual’s lively hood on the globe with so much as a bullhorn and a stick and get labeled an anarchist. Liberal media.:lol:

Again, I ask where was Faux Snooze? What a bunch of sheep!

Sorry buddy but capitalism isn't a problem. The govt growing in size while it doesn't have the funds to sustain it is.

I guess your right. The G20 is just a bunch of left wingers plotting to make the US government socialist.
 
:smh:

This is a prime example as to why it's important for ------ to read a book every once in a while.

I completely agreed with you, and in all actuality, took it a step further. Oh and BTW I'm black

:hmm:

:lol: Once again, Thoughtone is promoting unity to the BGOL community :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:smh:

This is a prime example as to why it's important for ----- to read a book every once in a while.

I completely agreed with you, and in all actuality, took it a step further. Oh and BTW I'm black

:hmm:

In the meantime, how about reading the Rules of this Board.

Peace,

QueEx
 
:smh:

This is a prime example as to why it's important for niggaz to read a book every once in a while.

I completely agreed with you, and in all actuality, took it a step further. Oh and BTW I'm black

:hmm:

I average more books in a month than you average in a year.

I can interpret situations and read between the lines. You think just because they are not yelling, "no n*ggar president" that they don't have contempt for the ultimate in authority figure being a Black person. You need to read a book and study history. I suggest you see the 1915 silent movie, "The Birth of a Nation," and then study the vitriol toward those apposed to slavery in the congressional record. A good many of those so called Tea Bag protests are covers for racism.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
 
Of course they wouldn't show up at the G20 Thoughtone. Finance shit is so far over their heads, they wouldn't get it anyway. You see how certifiably retarded and stupid they are on this health care debate. "Don't want government health care and leave my Medicare alone." type shit. Most will tell you G20 is a Bingo square. Dumb Fucks.
But they are not protesting because they don't like big government or that we were duped into spending trillions on a bullshit war in iraq. Didn't even bat an eye when Bush went in with his tin cup to bail out wall street.

These are the same assholes from the McCain/palin rallies protesting black people doing anything but picking cotton. Nothing more and nothing less. They don't even know they are working against their own best interests they are so full of hatred of non whites. So fuck 'em and their lackey asses who will do and say whatever to be one of them.

-VG
 
I average more books in a month than you average in a year.

:lol: The humor just don't stop wit u

You need to read a book and study history. I suggest you see the 1915 silent movie, "The Birth of a Nation," and then study the vitriol toward those apposed to slavery in the congressional record. A good many of those so called Tea Bag protests are covers for racism.

Thought, all-knowing, Can you tell me the reason for the first Boston Tea Party? Do you know the definition of Fascism?
 
Last edited:
I average more books in a month than you average in a year.

I can interpret situations and read between the lines. You think just because they are not yelling, "no n*ggar president" that they don't have contempt for the ultimate in authority figure being a Black person. You need to read a book and study history. I suggest you see the 1915 silent movie, "The Birth of a Nation," and then study the vitriol toward those apposed to slavery in the congressional record. A good many of those so called Tea Bag protests are covers for racism.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

C'mon man. All I said, was instead of just saying they are racist, I'd rather say they are ignorant. Because being ignorant can include racist along with many other things that fit the mindset of those folks. Once again:

I am not disagreeing with you

There's no secret underlying message I'm trying to convey

I simply used the word Ignorant as a a means to encompass: racist, mislead, uninformed, unintelligent, hateful, spiteful, fearful, fox news viewer, rush limbaugh fan, etc. etc. etc.. No need for taking offense, or trying to offend me (though I dont mind ethering folks every now and then, lol). If you'd rather the word "racist" be used, then do so by all means. But dont misinterpret me for trying to defend those idiots. We are on the same page here homie.


:smh:
 
:lol: The humor just don't stop wit u



Thought, all-knowing, Can you tell me the reason for the first Boston Tea Party? Do you know the definition of Fascism?

First Boston Tea Party? Was there more than one?

source: Common Dreams

The Real Boston Tea Party was an Anti-Corporate Revolt
by Thom Hartmann

CNBC Correspondent Rick Santelli called for a "Chicago Tea Party" on Feb 19th in protesting President Obama's plan to help homeowners in trouble. Santelli's call was answered by the right-wing group FreedomWorks, which funds campaigns promoting big business interests, and is the opposite of what the real Boston Tea Party was. FreedomWorks was funded in 2004 by Dick Armey (former Republican House Majority leader & lobbyist); consolidated Citizens for a Sound Economy, funded by the Koch family; and Empower America, a lobbying firm, that had fought against healthcare and minimum-wage efforts while hailing deregulation.

Anti-tax "tea party" organizers are delivering one million tea bags to a Washington, D.C., park Wednesday morning - to promote protests across the country by people they say are fed up with high taxes and excess spending.

The real Boston Tea Party was a protest against huge corporate tax cuts for the British East India Company, the largest trans-national corporation then in existence. This corporate tax cut threatened to decimate small Colonial businesses by helping the BEIC pull a Wal-Mart against small entrepreneurial tea shops, and individuals began a revolt that kicked-off a series of events that ended in the creation of The United States of America.

They covered their faces, massed in the streets, and destroyed the property of a giant global corporation. Declaring an end to global trade run by the East India Company that was destroying local economies, this small, masked minority started a revolution with an act of rebellion later called the Boston Tea Party.

On a cold November day in 1773, activists gathered in a coastal town. The corporation had gone too far, and the two thousand people who'd jammed into the meeting hall were torn as to what to do about it. Unemployment was exploding and the economic crisis was deepening; corporate crime, governmental corruption spawned by corporate cash, and an ethos of greed were blamed. "Why do we wait?" demanded one at the meeting, a fisherman named George Hewes. "The more we delay, the more strength is acquired" by the company and its puppets in the government. "Now is the time to prove our courage," he said. Soon, the moment came when the crowd decided for direct action and rushed into the streets.

That is how I tell the story of the Boston Tea Party, now that I have read a first-person account of it. While striving to understand my nation's struggles against corporations, in a rare book store I came upon a first edition of "Retrospect of the Boston Tea Party with a Memoir of George R.T. Hewes, a Survivor of the Little Band of Patriots Who Drowned the Tea in Boston Harbor in 1773," and I jumped at the chance to buy it. Because the identities of the Boston Tea Party participants were hidden (other than Samuel Adams) and all were sworn to secrecy for the next 50 years, this account is the only first-person account of the event by a participant that exists. As I read, I began to understand the true causes of the American Revolution.

I learned that the Boston Tea Party resembled in many ways the growing modern-day protests against transnational corporations and small-town efforts to protect themselves from chain-store retailers or factory farms. The Tea Party's participants thought of themselves as protesters against the actions of the multinational East India Company.

Although schoolchildren are usually taught that the American Revolution was a rebellion against "taxation without representation," akin to modern day conservative taxpayer revolts, in fact what led to the revolution was rage against a transnational corporation that, by the 1760s, dominated trade from China to India to the Caribbean, and controlled nearly all commerce to and from North America, with subsidies and special dispensation from the British crown.

Hewes notes: "The [East India] Company received permission to transport tea, free of all duty, from Great Britain to America..." allowing it to wipe out New England-based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. "Hence," wrote, "it was no longer the small vessels of private merchants, who went to vend tea for their own account in the ports of the colonies, but, on the contrary, ships of an enormous burthen, that transported immense quantities of this commodity ... The colonies were now arrived at the decisive moment when they must cast the dye, and determine their course ... "

A pamphlet was circulated through the colonies called The Alarm and signed by an enigmatic "Rusticus." One issue made clear the feelings of colonial Americans about England's largest transnational corporation and its behavior around the world: "Their Conduct in Asia, for some Years past, has given simple Proof, how little they regard the Laws of Nations, the Rights, Liberties, or Lives of Men. They have levied War, excited Rebellions, dethroned lawful Princes, and sacrificed Millions for the Sake of Gain. The Revenues of Mighty Kingdoms have entered their Coffers. And these not being sufficient to glut their Avarice, they have, by the most unparalleled Barbarities, Extortions, and Monopolies, stripped the miserable Inhabitants of their Property, and reduced whole Provinces to Indigence and Ruin. Fifteen hundred Thousands, it is said, perished by Famine in one Year, not because the Earth denied its Fruits; but [because] this Company and their Servants engulfed all the Necessaries of Life, and set them at so high a Price that the poor could not purchase them."

After protesters had turned back the Company's ships in Philadelphia and New York, Hewes writes, "In Boston the general voice declared the time was come to face the storm."

The citizens of the colonies were preparing to throw off one of the corporations that for almost 200 years had determined nearly every aspect of their lives through its economic and political power. They were planning to destroy the goods of the world's largest multinational corporation, intimidate its employees, and face down the guns of the government that supported it.

The queen's corporation

The East India Company's influence had always been pervasive in the colonies. Indeed, it was not the Puritans but the East India Company that founded America. The Puritans traveled to America on ships owned by the East India Company, which had already established the first colony in North America, at Jamestown, in the Company-owned Commonwealth of Virginia, stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi. The commonwealth was named after the "Virgin Queen," Elizabeth, who had chartered the corporation.

Elizabeth was trying to make England a player in the new global trade sparked by the European "discovery" of the Americas. The wealth Spain began extracting from the New World caught the attention of the European powers. In many European countries, particularly Holland and France, consortiums were put together to finance ships to sail the seas. In 1580, Queen Elizabeth became the largest shareholder in The Golden Hind, a ship owned by Sir Francis Drake.

The investment worked out well for Queen Elizabeth. There's no record of exactly how much she made when Drake paid her share of the Hind's dividends to her, but it was undoubtedly vast, since Drake himself and the other minor shareholders all received a 5000 percent return on their investment. Plus, because the queen placed a maximum loss to the initial investors of their investment amount only, it was a low-risk investment (for the investors at least-creditors, such as suppliers of provisions for the voyages or wood for the ships, or employees, for example, would be left unpaid if the venture failed, just as in a modern-day corporation). She was endorsing an investment model that led to the modern limited-liability corporation.

After making a fortune on Drake's expeditions, Elizabeth started looking for a more permanent arrangement. She authorized a group of 218 London merchants and noblemen to form a corporation. The East India Company was born on December 31, 1600.

By the 1760s, the East India Company's power had grown massive and worldwide. However, this rapid expansion, trying to keep ahead of the Dutch trading companies, was a mixed blessing, as the company went deep in debt to support its growth, and by 1770 found itself nearly bankrupt.

The company turned to a strategy that multinational corporations follow to this day: They lobbied for laws that would make it easy for them to put their small-business competitors out of business.

Most of the members of the British government and royalty (including the king) were stockholders in the East India Company, so it was easy to get laws passed in its interests. Among the Company's biggest and most vexing problems were American colonial entrepreneurs, who ran their own small ships to bring tea and other goods directly into America without routing them through Britain or through the Company. Between 1681 and 1773, a series of laws were passed granting the Company monopoly on tea sold in the American colonies and exempting it from tea taxes. Thus, the Company was able to lower its tea prices to undercut the prices of the local importers and the small tea houses in every town in America. But the colonists were unappreciative of their colonies being used as a profit center for the multinational corporation.

Boston's million-dollar tea party

And so, Hewes says, on a cold November evening of 1773, the first of the East India Company's ships of tax-free tea arrived. The next morning, a pamphlet was widely circulated calling on patriots to meet at Faneuil Hall to discuss resistance to the East India Company and its tea. "Things thus appeared to be hastening to a disastrous issue. The people of the country arrived in great numbers, the inhabitants of the town assembled. This assembly, on the 16th of December 1773, was the most numerous ever known, there being more than 2000 from the country present," said Hewes.

The group called for a vote on whether to oppose the landing of the tea. The vote was unanimously affirmative, and it is related by one historian of that scene "that a person disguised after the manner of the Indians, who was in the gallery, shouted at this juncture, the cry of war; and that the meeting dissolved in the twinkling of an eye, and the multitude rushed in a mass to Griffin's wharf."

That night, Hewes dressed as an Indian, blackening his face with coal dust, and joined crowds of other men in hacking apart the chests of tea and throwing them into the harbor. In all, the 342 chests of tea-over 90,000 pounds-thrown overboard that night were enough to make 24 million cups of tea and were valued by the East India Company at 9,659 Pounds Sterling or, in today's currency, just over $1 million.

In response, the British Parliament immediately passed the Boston Port Act stating that the port of Boston would be closed until the citizens of Boston reimbursed the East India Company for the tea they had destroyed. The colonists refused. A year and a half later, the colonists would again state their defiance of the East India Company and Great Britain by taking on British troops in an armed conflict at Lexington and Concord (the "shots heard 'round the world") on April 19, 1775.

That war-finally triggered by a transnational corporation and its government patrons trying to deny American colonists a fair and competitive local marketplace-would end with independence for the colonies.

The revolutionaries had put the East India Company in its place with the Boston Tea Party, and that, they thought, was the end of that. Unfortunately, the Boston Tea Party was not the end; within 150 years, during the so-called Gilded Age, powerful rail, steel, and oil interests would rise up to begin a new form of oligarchy, capturing the newly-formed Republican Party in the 1880s, and have been working to establish a permanent wealthy and ruling class in this country ever since.
 
C'mon man. All I said, was instead of just saying they are racist, I'd rather say they are ignorant. Because being ignorant can include racist along with many other things that fit the mindset of those folks. Once again:

I am not disagreeing with you

There's no secret underlying message I'm trying to convey

I simply used the word Ignorant as a a means to encompass: racist, mislead, uninformed, unintelligent, hateful, spiteful, fearful, fox news viewer, rush limbaugh fan, etc. etc. etc.. No need for taking offense, or trying to offend me (though I dont mind ethering folks every now and then, lol). If you'd rather the word "racist" be used, then do so by all means. But dont misinterpret me for trying to defend those idiots. We are on the same page here homie.


:smh:

Many dismiss racism as being ignorant. As if those that are racist cannot help themselves or are just misinformed, lacking in knowledge of the facts. I contend they know exactly what the do. To reduce the counter point of view as not worthy of consideration based on haltered. For sure, many that protest against Obama have true political differences with his policies. However, any sane person can see the racism in many of these protests.
 
*sigh* somethings just do not change.

Unlike Obama, the "teabaggers" do not want to become OVEREXPOSED on the media. Too bad, thought didn't think of this before he posted this bullshit. Hold up, I'm assuming that Thought actually THINKS about anything.

Lets have a summery of THOUGHTS ironic stance....

1. He believes that everyone needs to pay for insurance *so does republicans, however, they do not want a GOVERNMENT OPTION*

2. He believes that the youth is lazy, and needs to take care themselves. *so does conservatives, however, conservatives understand BUSINESS because most conservatives own companies....*

3. He believes we shouldn't be in war, a matter of fact, he believes our military is too big. *so does conservatives. Thus, why they push for better military TECHNOLOGY so we can limit the man power with quality weaponry*

4. He believes the government needs to take care of people, yet, he is not willing to share his money. *typical liberal. Do what I say, not what I do*

5. He constantly needs a political enemy. *so did the nazi's, communist, fascists, and any other despotism political system...*

6. When he can't argue his case, he goes into name calling. *sometimes the only comeback a person got is to downgrade their opponent. A true sign of immaturity....*

7. He deals with absolute. *if you are a star wars fan, dealing with absolutes is a true sign of an evil motive*

8. He believes that emotion is better than rational. *Basically, he gets pissed when you disagree with him.*

9. He is the ultimate idealist. *If you don't believe in who he believes, then he thinks you are beneath him.*

10. He takes things personal. *When you look at him as a civilize person, he looks at you like you're satan himself (unless you agree with him)*
 
*sigh* somethings just do not change.

Unlike Obama, the "teabaggers" do not want to become OVEREXPOSED on the media. Too bad, thought didn't think of this before he posted this bullshit. Hold up, I'm assuming that Thought actually THINKS about anything.

Lets have a summery of THOUGHTS ironic stance....

1. He believes that everyone needs to pay for insurance *so does republicans, however, they do not want a GOVERNMENT OPTION*

2. He believes that the youth is lazy, and needs to take care themselves. *so does conservatives, however, conservatives understand BUSINESS because most conservatives own companies....*

3. He believes we shouldn't be in war, a matter of fact, he believes our military is too big. *so does conservatives. Thus, why they push for better military TECHNOLOGY so we can limit the man power with quality weaponry*

4. He believes the government needs to take care of people, yet, he is not willing to share his money. *typical liberal. Do what I say, not what I do*

5. He constantly needs a political enemy. *so did the nazi's, communist, fascists, and any other despotism political system...*

6. When he can't argue his case, he goes into name calling. *sometimes the only comeback a person got is to downgrade their opponent. A true sign of immaturity....*

7. He deals with absolute. *if you are a star wars fan, dealing with absolutes is a true sign of an evil motive*

8. He believes that emotion is better than rational. *Basically, he gets pissed when you disagree with him.*

9. He is the ultimate idealist. *If you don't believe in who he believes, then he thinks you are beneath him.*

10. He takes things personal. *When you look at him as a civilize person, he looks at you like you're satan himself (unless you agree with him)*

Unlike Obama, the "teabaggers" do not want to become OVEREXPOSED on the media.


1956_july_train_laughing.jpg

actinanass when I think you can't top yourself, you always seem to do yourself one better. You never disappoint, so to speak.
 
1956_july_train_laughing.jpg

actinanass when I think you can't top yourself, you always seem to do yourself one better. You never disappoint, so to speak.

thus, you proved my point.

Not to mention, you do this with everyone you debate with. It's like debating a child. I'm just a 25 year old dude. You should be teaching me things lol. Seriously, how can I have more clarity about life than a person twice my age?

Sometimes, I think the reason our community is fucked up is because we have grown ass people acting like kids. Which is very sad.... You still wanna promote "the white man this, the white man that...* instead of pushing knowledge about how we can HELP OURSELVES. Honestly, we do not need a health care reform if more people LIKE YOU wasn't so hateful in the first place. If you put your energy you have towards hating republicans into bettering our community, we wouldn't need the government help. However, people like you love to have their heads up their asses when it comes to actually taking responsibility. Your mentality is why black women look at good dudes crazy. Your mentality is why we are still where we at RIGHT NOW. Even with a black president. Sad thing about it, you don't think anything is wrong with it. Sometimes debating you is like debating an insane person that's in denial. Yet, you think you are a strong black man huh? Please....

On the post at hand, there's no point to keep having rallies every month. The smart thing the "teabaggers" can do is to have strategic timing. BTW, I didn't hear this cynicism when CODE PINK was rallying. Is it because you are more sympathetic towards your favorite color?
 
First Boston Tea Party? Was there more than one?

The Real Boston Tea Party was an Anti-Corporate Revolt
by Thom Hartmann

Thom Hartmann, I know you can do better than that! Next thing you gon tell me is we fought British Corporations during the Revolutionary War. C'mon Man :D
 
thus, you proved my point.

Not to mention, you do this with everyone you debate with. It's like debating a child. I'm just a 25 year old dude. You should be teaching me things lol. Seriously, how can I have more clarity about life than a person twice my age?

Sometimes, I think the reason our community is fucked up is because we have grown ass people acting like kids. Which is very sad.... You still wanna promote "the white man this, the white man that...* instead of pushing knowledge about how we can HELP OURSELVES. Honestly, we do not need a health care reform if more people LIKE YOU wasn't so hateful in the first place. If you put your energy you have towards hating republicans into bettering our community, we wouldn't need the government help. However, people like you love to have their heads up their asses when it comes to actually taking responsibility. Your mentality is why black women look at good dudes crazy. Your mentality is why we are still where we at RIGHT NOW. Even with a black president. Sad thing about it, you don't think anything is wrong with it. Sometimes debating you is like debating an insane person that's in denial. Yet, you think you are a strong black man huh? Please....

On the post at hand, there's no point to keep having rallies every month. The smart thing the "teabaggers" can do is to have strategic timing. BTW, I didn't hear this cynicism when CODE PINK was rallying. Is it because you are more sympathetic towards your favorite color?

I'm just a 25 year old dude.

Oh really? I thought you were a 14 year old. Low profile? The sad part is you actually think you are impressing everyone with your lack of knowledge.:smh:

source: The Stranger

Malkin: Tea-Bagger Crowd 2 Million! (Give or Take 1.95 Million)
Posted by Anthony Hecht on Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 12:49 AM
Michelle Malkin and other conservative bloggers and Twitterers have been spending the day sowing confusion and misinformation about how many whackos showed up in D.C. today for that unintentionally ironic sign convention, or whatever it was.

First Malkin said that ABC News was estimating the crowd at 2 million.

ABC was all, "Ummm... No, we didn't say that. We said "thousands."

So Malkin updated her post, not to say there were actually 70,000 people at most (some estimates were as low as 30,000, including the organizers' own estimate), but instead to go on and on (and on) about how it's impossible to tell how many people there really were, and boy, it sure looks like a lot of people in the pictures! It's more people than she can count on one hand, so whatever, liberal media.. 2 million!

Jay Rosen has been providing a running timeline on Twitter here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Now I'm going back to pretending Michelle Malkin doesn't exist. Ahh.

<iframe src="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/sep/14/tea-party-photo-shows-large-crowd-different-event/" width=800 height=1000></iframe>
 
Oh really? I thought you were a 14 year old. Low profile? The sad part is you actually think you are impressing everyone with your lack of knowledge.:smh:

source: The Stranger

Malkin: Tea-Bagger Crowd 2 Million! (Give or Take 1.95 Million)
Posted by Anthony Hecht on Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 12:49 AM
Michelle Malkin and other conservative bloggers and Twitterers have been spending the day sowing confusion and misinformation about how many whackos showed up in D.C. today for that unintentionally ironic sign convention, or whatever it was.

First Malkin said that ABC News was estimating the crowd at 2 million.

ABC was all, "Ummm... No, we didn't say that. We said "thousands."

So Malkin updated her post, not to say there were actually 70,000 people at most (some estimates were as low as 30,000, including the organizers' own estimate), but instead to go on and on (and on) about how it's impossible to tell how many people there really were, and boy, it sure looks like a lot of people in the pictures! It's more people than she can count on one hand, so whatever, liberal media.. 2 million!

Jay Rosen has been providing a running timeline on Twitter here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Now I'm going back to pretending Michelle Malkin doesn't exist. Ahh.

<iframe src="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/sep/14/tea-party-photo-shows-large-crowd-different-event/" width=800 height=1000></iframe>

What does this have to do with anything I just said about you? Do I care about how many showed up at the rally? NO. The fact that there was a rally should scare you enough.

Back on what I said about you, since you aren't denying my claims, its proof that I'm right about something I said. You action say "I need to deflect attention off me because Actin struck a nerve". Thus, why you went back into your name calling mode. It's cool to be wrong ONCE in a while dude. Just take your loss...
 
What does this have to do with anything I just said about you? Do I care about how many showed up at the rally? NO. The fact that there was a rally should scare you enough.

Back on what I said about you, since you aren't denying my claims, its proof that I'm right about something I said. You action say "I need to deflect attention off me because Actin struck a nerve". Thus, why you went back into your name calling mode. It's cool to be wrong ONCE in a while dude. Just take your loss...

Your posts are as incoherent as ever. I never expect you to veer from the GOP talking points weekly email.

Now back to the topic. Why don't the Tea Baggers care about corporate domination?
 
Last edited:
Actually read the article and then comment.

What I responded to was the ridiculousness of the insinuation that we were fighting corporations without recognizing the obvious enabler to the conflict - Govt. intervention. And I quote from this wingnut's own article:

Most of the members of the British government and royalty (including the king) were stockholders in the East India Company, so it was easy to get laws passed in its interests. Among the Company's biggest and most vexing problems were American colonial entrepreneurs, who ran their own small ships to bring tea and other goods directly into America without routing them through Britain or through the Company. Between 1681 and 1773, a series of laws were passed granting the Company monopoly on tea sold in the American colonies and exempting it from tea taxes.

Quote Number 2 from this jackbutt:

the British Parliament immediately passed the Boston Port Act stating that the port of Boston would be closed until the citizens of Boston reimbursed the East India Company for the tea they had destroyed. The colonists refused. A year and a half later, the colonists would again state their defiance of the East India Company and Great Britain by taking on British troops in an armed conflict

Moral of the story, keep govt out of the way and let the free market decide the winners & losers. Once again, Do you know the definition of Fascism?
 
Your posts are as incoherent as ever. I never expect you to veer from the GOP talking points weekly email.

Now back to the topic. Why don't the Tea Baggers care about corporate domination?

There you go again, trying to discredit anyone that disagrees with your premise.

Who said the tea baggers do not care about corporate domination? I think the "teabaggers" care more about GOVERNMENT domination.

You do know what the difference is right?
 
What I responded to was the ridiculousness of the insinuation that we were fighting corporations without recognizing the obvious enabler to the conflict - Govt. intervention. And I quote from this wingnut's own article:



Quote Number 2 from this jackbutt:



Moral of the story, keep govt out of the way and let the free market decide the winners & losers. Once again, Do you know the definition of Fascism?

...let the free market decide the winners & losers.

But isn't that the free market? Wasn't the East India Company the winner? Who ultimately put the East India Company in check?
 
But isn't that the free market? Wasn't the East India Company the winner? Who ultimately put the East India Company in check?

...Do you think government should be the ones who dictate who wins, or lose in the market?

Please don't avoid this question....
 
...Do you think government should be the ones who dictate who wins, or lose in the market?

Please don't avoid this question....



Do you think Exxon/Mobil should get tax credits for oil exploration?

Should tax payers help foot the bill of sports stadiums and then charge the public for admission?
 
Last edited:
Do you think Exxon/Mobil should get tax credits for oil exploration?

Should tax payers help foot the bill of sports stadiums and then charge the public for admission?

...Do you think government should be the ones who dictate who wins, or lose in the market?

Please don't avoid this question....
 
...Do you think government should be the ones who dictate who wins, or lose in the market?

Please don't avoid this question....

Please, I deal with your questions the way you deal with mine. And you know you are all for tax breaks so you agree the market place is forever skewed.
 
But isn't that the free market?

no, thats not the free market! the British govt colluded with big biz to stifle the people, sound familiar?

Wasn't the East India Company the winner?

Ultimately, they lost!

Who ultimately put the East India Company in check?

the American people stood up to tyranny from the British govt & army and kicked they azz. Didn't you read the article, the Queen financed East India Co!

Should tax payers help foot the bill of sports stadiums and then charge the public for admission?

City councils vote on these stadium packages, and once again, its a scenario where govt colludes with big biz to stifle the people. I don't know how much more obvious it has to get. Govt is the enabler to all these businesses running over the people.

Without the govt, Haliburton wouldn't get all those no-bid contracts, right?

Without the govt, China-Mart wouldn't have gotten all those land grants, right?

Without the govt, BlackWater wouldn't be so destructive in the Middle East, right?

Without the govt, the banks that are charging ridiculous interest rates and fees, would be "out of biz". The free market was trying to purge all the ill-gotten gains but govt (led by Dubya & Obama) had to intervene and bail them out, now Bank of America & AIG is givin us the finger :smh:

Typical of the govt: Totally mess up the economy with taxes, wars, bailouts, stimulus's and regulations, then blame it on Capitalism, :D
 
Last edited:
Please, I deal with your questions the way you deal with mine. And you know you are all for tax breaks so you agree the market place is forever skewed.

Is it skewed to you because you feel that the government has a better say for what the market place should be, in your opinion?

I hear you talk about greedy corporate people, however, I never hear you talk about how greedy government can be.

To end our ongoing feud, I just want to hear you say "I think the government is smarter than everyone else". Reason being, in enough words, you have proved me right when it comes to my assumptions about you. For the record, I do not like to assume anything about how a person thinks, but you make it really hard not to.

I know you won't say that. Only because you know that would make you as worst as ME. Hell, at least I'm for helping the American people MAKE money. Seems like you fight that notion every chance you get. I say "give businesses a tax cuts for new jobs" you say "the greedy corporations do not need more money, and Americans need to cut back...."

In that instance, I could pull a liberal talking point, and say "if you are against corporations, then you're against the AMERICAN PEOPLE succeeding". However, that would make me a RIGHT WINGNUT right?
 
Back
Top