patrick.net

It is not a “savings account” in any sense. If you want your lifetime inflation-adjusted contributions back I maybe could see that, but asking for interest just shows an absurd misunderstanding of what the program actually is.

So you're admitting that many/most people can never hope to get out of Social security what they put in it? That makes it a Ponzi scheme right? And what does that make you personally, excusing and defending a system which isn't much different from the system which Bernie Madoff ran? If it's "absurd" to expect to receive a payment with reasonable interest, then you're defending a scam, nothing more.

Social Security is clearly a socialist institution whereby this year’s contributions are used to pay this years expenses. It’s a form of insurance

Why do you liberal fascists insist that Social security and medicare be MANDATORY? It's because you think you know what's best for everyone else.

Wild Turkey evaps quick

ZippyDDoodah says

So you’re admitting that many/most people can never hope to get out of Social security what they put it? That makes it a Ponzi scheme right? And what does that make you personally, excusing and defending a system which isn’t much different from the system which Bernie Madoff ran? If it’s “aburd” to expect to receive a payment with reasonable interest, then you’re defending a scam, nothing more.

So when you pay money to HMO every year, do you expect you will get out what you put in? What if you don't have any health problems, aren't you being cheated? That money is just gone. Worse yet it's probably used to treat some undeserving layabout. When you hit the limit of what you put into the HMO do they start pulling money out of your bank account?

I'm not interested in hypotheticals or "how it ought to be?". Here's how it is. Deal with it.

So when you pay money to HMO every year, do you expect you will get out what you put in?

Except that Social security was never intended to be or sold as an "insurance". It was a retirement income for retirees. You're dishonest as hell to suggest otherwise

elliemae says

simchaland says

Elliemae, didn’t anyone ever tell you that liquids should never be anywhere near the computer? And if you have liquid near you computer, vodka is the best, it’ll evaporate quickly if spewed out of your mouth. (Well, it’s an excuse anyway.)

Great, now you tell me. I’ll just hop in the car and drive 25 miles to the nearest state-owned liquor store and buy some. Except it’s Sunday and it’s closed…

Yeah, that sucks. I'm glad I don't live in Utah, no offense meant. I don't like religious zealots controlling government telling me how I should live my life. It reminds me of the 8 years of darkness we had under that twit GWB and the reason I don't ever want to visit his buddies in Saudi Arabia. And it reminds me of all the LDS money funneled into California to pass Prop 8. Grumble, grumble, grumble...

Bap33 says

Wild Turkey evaps quick

Yes it does. Be sure to get the 101. It actually has the best flavor. I like to sip mine over ice.

Wow, Bap33! Did we just agree on something?

ZippyDDoodah says

Except that Social security was never intended to be or sold as an “insurance”. It was a retirement income for retirees. You’re dishonest as hell to suggest otherwise

It's referred to as the "Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program." What do think FICA stands for? Federal INSURANCE Contributions Act! It's plainly labelled as such, and anyone who cannot comprehend that probably shouldn't be allowed to handle sharp objects.

Social security is considered old age "retirement income" no matter what the govt. names it. To suggest otherwise is dishonest as hell.

Social Security is plainly labelled as an "Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program". Ignorance of the fact it's a mandatory INSURANCE program is not the fault of the agency which informs you otherwise in all documents.

I have no doubt the 50+% of the Tea Party that gladly partake of unemployment insurance, MediCare, MedicAid, and Social Security are willing to play "jailhouse lawyer" when they need something and comb through every piece of paper to get the outcome they want. It takes a real special type to deliberately misunderstand the entire basis of the operation along the way. Tea Party strikes me as the worst of the Boomers, entitled as hell and raging self-deluded hypocrites about it. I'll raise a glass of beer tomorrow night over dinner to the Teabaggers, here's to you Mr. "keep the gubmit out of my MediCare!"

ZippyDDoodah says

Large majorities of Tea Party protesters would be happy as clams to opt out of Medicare and Social Security.. just as long as the govt pays us back with interest for all the social security taxes and Medicare taxes that we’ve paid into the system over the years.

It's that kind of bullshit qualification that shows the lack of conviction. "Oh yeah, we'll give it up as long as you do this first". BULLSHIT. Call for an end to it, stand up for something, grow a fucking pair for christ's sake.

I call bullshit on anyone claiming that they want to opt out of medicare. Quite simply, you'd have no way of getting health care when you're over 65. The same goes for social security, since hardly any of these people have any retirement to speak of.

ZippyDDoodah says

Except that Social security was never intended to be or sold as an “insurance”. It was a retirement income for retirees. You’re dishonest as hell to suggest otherwise

You're joking, right? Do you even know what OSDI stands for? Medicare and social security were clearly identified as insurance-like systems from their inception. The fact that you're not aware of that tells me that you clearly don't care enough what you claim to not like.

Frankly, I'm not a fan of social security and medicare. I don't believe that they're very well designed systems, and I'd fully support ending them. I do actually understand how they work, though, which is the least I'd expect of anyone complaining about them.

The "large majorities" thing sounds like more bullshit to me. The tea party rhetoric during the health care debate was all about being afraid that obama was going to hurt medicare. I sincerely doubt that anyone openly advocating for an end to these two programs would win any state in a general election.

I also notice that you ignore the issue of the military. We spent a trillion dollars on it last year. You can not claim that you're for small government if you endorse spending a trillion dollars on the military.

ZippyDDoodah says

Social Security is clearly a socialist institution whereby this year’s contributions are used to pay this years expenses. It’s a form of insurance

Why do you liberal fascists insist that Social security and medicare be MANDATORY?

You know, if you're going to ask a question it's polite to not stuff words in our mouths to make an answer to make a point. That's just unresponsive abuse.

Assuming you're not just trolling here. Tough to tell, really.

Anyhoo, my answer to this question, which I repeat whenever I can, is that all taxes and other mandatory contributions taken at gunpoint come out of rents (and land values).

By mandating as much as we can from paychecks, we take this money out of the flow that goes to our daily living costs, and for nearly everyone the dominant daily living cost is the rent or mortgage payment.

neo-classical economics is called the dismal science because it insists difficult choices must be made, there is no such thing as a free lunch. I'm convinced by Dr Mason Gaffney and others' argument that a high-tax and high-service mixed economy is more optimal.

ZippyDDoodah says

It’s because you think you know what’s best for everyone else.

No, SS came about because it was empirically obvious that people were failing to save enough to get through their old age. Medicare, too, was a government response to a social need.

Liberal fascism, elitism, whatever, if it works better than the status quo ante I'm all for it. Ideology is for suckers.

simchaland says

And it reminds me of all the LDS money funneled into California to pass Prop 8. Grumble, grumble, grumble…

Sorry 'bout that. MF's collect 10% of member's income so they can dictate how other people live. If I were the Queen of Everything, I'd change that. You should be able to marry whomever you want, and it doesn't affect me.

Unless you try to marry animals. Because I've heard the argument that if gays can marry each other, next you'll want to marry animals and mine are really cute and remain unmarried.

Ellen Degeneres had a routine about how marrying a goat would run into some snags, such as when you're reading the morning paper and the goat eats it. She obviously doesn't know her goats - because they eat shiny things like ads & coupon sheets. So unless you're a cheap gay goat-marrying person, your morning paper is safe. But I digress.

My goats aren't the people marrying type. So keep your hooves off my critters. That goes for chickens and all sorts of domesticated animals. And no getting them drunk on the wild turkey. If I see you attempting to convert my critters into the gay lifestyle (such as their caring about their appearance) I'll be looking for you. I'll give you a pass on my lesbian dog that not only humps a pillow on a daily basis but has a thing going on with the female neighbor dog... it's too late for her.

OMG! I just outed my pup! Now they'll never vote me the Queen of Everything!

I'll recommend your pups to this sanctuary. And everything's super, thanks for asking.

Good luck with your pets. Its so hard to keep them in line these days.

When conservatives/libertarians/teabaggers (whatever they're calling themselves this week) start complaining about some of these strange marriages I'll start taking whatever their latest sidetracking argument against gays less cynically:
http://www.oddee.com/item_97042.aspx

and in line with the post topic, I love this:
"Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - by Tim Wise
http://cosmicnavellint.blogspot.com/2010/04/imagine-if-tea-party-was-black-tim-wise.html
"Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition..."

kind of expected, but kind of also puts a good perspective on it and its an excellent compendium of some recent batshit antics by people who associate themselves with "the tea party".

And for those who won't bother to read the thing I'll skip ahead to the summary, which should make the point clear enough:
"And this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis."

cheers.

kind of expected, but kind of also puts a good perspective on it and its an excellent compendium of some recent batshit antics by people who associate themselves with “the tea party”.

So a 100% fictional webpost equates to a "good perspective" on those who associate with the Tea party, right? Brilliant reasoning. No doubt you don't see yourself as delusional..

OK guys come to your senses. If the opening paragraph is true about Somalia then it is an anarchy. Tea party folks want LIMITED government and far from an Anarchy. Our government is a LIMITED Constitutional Republic. Over the years Congress and Presidents have usurped the Constitution and the role of government. Some of the worst ones are "Dishonest" Abe Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Bush and Usurper Barry Soreto (aka OBAMA).

The Tea Party will be a force to be reckon with in 2010 and 2012 (likely 2016). If the establishment GOP does not change to get their support - they will be in the doldrums. Don't forget - the Tea Party also include conservative Dems. Actually, the Tea Party did not begin after Obama became president. It was re-instituted with the Ron Paul campaign in 2008.

For those who have wrath against the Tea Party must also be hateful of the original Boston Tea Party. You Liberals are unable to discern the times. Ron Paul in 2012! A poll shows he is neck to neck vs Obama. What does this tell you about Obama?

simchaland says

I’ll recommend your pups to this sanctuary. And everything’s super, thanks for asking.

Ok, I forgot to ask... I'd forgotten the South Park link. I do think Prop 8 was ridiculous and a waste of time & energy. People should live their lives and stop worrying about how everyone else lives. I even love my secretly lesbian dog and her little "friend."

I do like the "if the tea party were black" theme. Food for thought.

hMisstrial says

simchaland says

Misstrial says

simchaland says

Misstrial,
I’m here to stay. Get used to it. So, you uneducated, rude, narcissistic, vapid, and rigid Californians may have to learn to become human beings after all.
Good luck. I’m not sure you guys have the capacity for becoming real human beings, but time will tell.

Wow.
You just revealed yourself as being everything I posted above.
God help us here in California.
Just remember to stay off the 580 and 880 when you are particularly angry.
~Misstrial

Oh, and one other thing… You people can’t even drive. Did any of you get anything out of Driver’s Ed or did they cut that from your educational system too along with geography, history, physical education, art, music, philosophy, civics, and political science?

OMG “you people” - LOL
Keep it up, just keep it up! I’m sure readers are getting some laughs at your expense now. LOL
~Misstrial

Geez...I dont generally agree with Misstrial because of her snarky comments but the "you people" comment is way out of line. Aren't we people Americans?

Nomograph says

ZippyDDoodah says

Tea Party types were strongly opposed to TARP and the pork laden stimulus bill.

Tea Party “types” opposed absolutely none of Bush’s wasteful spending. They began protesting once Obama was elected, not a minute sooner, and everyone knows this.
If (and that’s a big if) the Tea Party manages to purge themselves of the racist, white supremacist, and militia elements, they stand a chance of gaining some traction with middle Americans. Personally, I don’t think they will be able to do so, which is why they will most likely remain a political sideshow of bad behavior.

hey, I thought i was the only one who noticed the bigotry?

ZippyDDoodah says

So a 100% fictional webpost equates to a “good perspective” on those who associate with the Tea party, right? Brilliant reasoning. No doubt you don’t see yourself as delusional..

Dude, at least I read the posts I comment on. There's not a single thing fictional in it. You don't really get 'humour' do you? I've noticed that.

If (and that’s a big if) the Tea Party manages to purge themselves of the racist, white supremacist, and militia elements,

There'd be nothing left!

wcalleallegre says

The Tea Party will be a force to be reckon with in 2010 and 2012 (likely 2016).

Teabaggers are so CUTE! So incredibly certain you will wreak havoc on THE MAN. I had friends who were really into Ross Perot, others who were active with Ralph Nader campaign. I doubt you'll see the parallels though. Keep those flags flying, it's entertaining for us to watch.

4X says

hMisstrial says

simchaland says

Misstrial says

simchaland says

Misstrial,

I’m here to stay. Get used to it. So, you uneducated, rude, narcissistic, vapid, and rigid Californians may have to learn to become human beings after all.

Good luck. I’m not sure you guys have the capacity for becoming real human beings, but time will tell.

Wow.

You just revealed yourself as being everything I posted above.

God help us here in California.

Just remember to stay off the 580 and 880 when you are particularly angry.

~Misstrial

Oh, and one other thing… You people can’t even drive. Did any of you get anything out of Driver’s Ed or did they cut that from your educational system too along with geography, history, physical education, art, music, philosophy, civics, and political science?

OMG “you people” - LOL

Keep it up, just keep it up! I’m sure readers are getting some laughs at your expense now. LOL

~Misstrial

Geez…I dont generally agree with Misstrial because of her snarky comments but the “you people” comment is way out of line. Aren’t we people Americans?

(On Soapbox)

Did I forget to mention that I'm a Liberal who holds almost no credence in politically correct phraseology? Why is it that people get offended only when certain buzz phrases or words are written or said instead of being offended when there is actual bigotry or racism happening? Why is it that certain people are so focused on words that they forget to check how they act toward others and the judgments that they make about people?

"You people" was meant to be offensive. Get it? And no, it's not a racial or ethnic reference for the PC Police here. Sometimes, just because you see two words together that in another context sound like they're racist or bigoted doesn't mean that every time you see those words together there is something racist or bigoted afoot.

It's time that BayAryans learn to let go of their PC blinders and actually practice what they preach instead of monitoring spoken and written words so that they can be "outraged" without considering the context.

I'm fed up with BayAryans who use all of the PC lingo while telling me that they don't want any of the people I serve to live in THEIR neighborhoods. NIMBYism is alive and well here in the Bay Area. Socioeconomic bigotry, racism, classism, and other forms of hatred are practiced daily by some of the most PC versed people I know here. It disgusts me that these BayAryans hide their racism, classism, and socioeconomic bigotry behind PC language while they practice racism, classism, and socioeconomic bigotry in every facet of their lives.

By the way, I use the term "BayAryan" consciously since I've noticed that the biggest offenders tend to be white people who consider themselves "Liberal" but are adherents of some weird version of Ultra-Orthodox "Dogmatic Bay Area Ultra Liberalism" that is utterly foreign to the political or philosophical underpinnings of the adjective "Liberal." These are the same BayAryans who consider it a necessity to believe that the Palestinians are 100% innocent bystanders and the Israelis are 100% the aggressors (without actually knowing anything about the actual history of the conflict and deciding what must be good for the Middle East from comfortable arm chairs in the USA). They also tend to frown upon anyone who doesn't buy organic, recycle, compost, adhere to a strict vegan diet, blame tobacco smokers for everything from asthma in children living 10 floors away from someone who smokes to sunspots while persecuting said tobacco smokers with ever more restrictive laws and taxes while advocating for the right of cannabis smokers to toke anywhere they like, or any other "Sacred Cow" that they have decided is a "must" for anyone who is "enlightened." These BayAreans are best described as Dogmatic Extreme Bay Area Ultra-Leftists and they often look a lot like the Dogmatic Extreme Ultra-Conservative Right Wingers that they so vehemently despise.

(off of soapbox)

(P.S.: I'm considered white here, as if that should matter.)

Simcha:
Ya look like a brown bear to me. And I assumed that the "you people" meant antidentites," of which I'm one.

"You people" make me look sane.

Tenouncetrout says

“You people” make me look sane.

...and straight.

elliemae says

Simcha:
Ya look like a brown bear to me. And I assumed that the “you people” meant antidentites,” of which I’m one.

Yes, and furless creatures.

elliemae says

Tenouncetrout says

“You people” make me look sane.

…and straight.

...and scaly.

simchaland says

Yes, and furless creatures.

Okay, I'm an antidentite, but clearly not furless. I'm a'skeered of alot of things. Like someone who's angry after being manipulated by Faux News. Tea parties were created by the company and reaps huge financial benefits from their promotion.

Tenouncetrout says

Do you think they found the most coherent ones to talk to?
You folks make GREAT subjects. You take anything you see as exactly as it’s presented with out question.
While OBAMA and this administration LIES to you hourly and you don’t question it once.

We dont question it because it is laid out in clear, plain English in a calm, subtle manner. No yelling, screaming or ranting like the Tea Baggers are engaging in. There is a difference between fact and fiction, making decisions based on pragmatism and jumping out on a leap of faith.

elliemae says

Simcha:
Ya look like a brown bear to me. And I assumed that the “you people” meant antidentites,” of which I’m one.

I thought he was referring to the green people on Mars...anyways, the "you people" phrase indicated to me that you felt "us" people were not in tune with what is best for America. I wasnt referring to your skin color, pale or not.

ZippyDDoodah says

Social Security is clearly a socialist institution whereby this year’s contributions are used to pay this years expenses. It’s a form of insurance

Why do you liberal fascists insist that Social security and medicare be MANDATORY? It’s because you think you know what’s best for everyone else.

Why do you arch-conservatives insist on NOT providing any services to the poor, weak and elderly? If you like, Mexico does not offer any social services programs and has a few beach resort cities that you are more than welcome to retire to.

-You run to church to give 10% tithes so the church can prosper and spread your hatred of other religions but refuse to spend the same for programs that actually help assist our communities.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we are going to provide health care to the poor because you believe that the POOR are BLACK/MEXICAN when in actuality whites still make up a majority of the lower income families in terms of sheer numbers.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we liberals are attempting to introduce banking legislation, but proclaim your excitement when told we would invade Iraq to destroy another 1 million muslim lives.

- You would rather engage in war with other countries than take care of the problems hear in America

- You and the PARTY OF NO refuse to allow our nation to spend on programs aimed at progressing past a 3rd world education system, health care system, economic system but are openly OK with spending 1 trillion a year on War and Defense.

If you hate them so much, when will you arch-conservatives stop using our liberal Social Services?

Vicente says

Social Security is plainly labelled as an “Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program”. Ignorance of the fact it’s a mandatory INSURANCE program is not the fault of the agency which informs you otherwise in all documents.
I have no doubt the 50+% of the Tea Party that gladly partake of unemployment insurance, MediCare, MedicAid, and Social Security are willing to play “jailhouse lawyer” when they need something and comb through every piece of paper to get the outcome they want. It takes a real special type to deliberately misunderstand the entire basis of the operation along the way. Tea Party strikes me as the worst of the Boomers, entitled as hell and raging self-deluded hypocrites about it. I’ll raise a glass of beer tomorrow night over dinner to the Teabaggers, here’s to you Mr. “keep the gubmit out of my MediCare!”

They are cowards who wont stand up for what they believe in, all they have to do is stop receiving welfare, unemployment and retirement checks.

@ARCH CONSERVATIVES

-You run to church to give 10% tithes so the church can prosper and spread your hatred of other religions but refuse to spend the same for programs that actually help assist our communities.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we are going to provide health care to the poor because you believe that the POOR are BLACK/MEXICAN when in actuality whites still make up a majority of the lower income families in terms of sheer numbers.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we liberals are attempting to introduce banking legislation, but proclaim your excitement when told we would invade Iraq to destroy another 1 million muslim lives.

- You would rather engage in war with other countries than take care of the problems hear in America

- You and the PARTY OF NO refuse to allow our nation to spend on programs aimed at progressing past a 3rd world education system, health care system, economic system but are openly OK with spending 1 trillion a year on War and Defense.

@ZIPPY DO LITTLE FOR THIS NATION

-You run to church to give 10% tithes so the church can prosper and spread your hatred of other religions but refuse to spend the same for programs that actually help assist our communities.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we are going to provide health care to the poor because you believe that the POOR are BLACK/MEXICAN when in actuality whites still make up a majority of the lower income families in terms of sheer numbers.

- You become infuriated when you hear that we liberals are attempting to introduce banking legislation, but proclaim your excitement when told we would invade Iraq to destroy another 1 million muslim lives.

- You would rather engage in war with other countries than take care of the problems hear in America

- You and the PARTY OF NO refuse to allow our nation to spend on programs aimed at progressing past a 3rd world education system, health care system, economic system but are openly OK with spending 1 trillion a year on War and Defense.

simchaland says

It’s amazing how conservatives project fear onto Liberals. I’m learning so much about conservatism. Naming qualities that exist within yourself and claiming that these qualities belong to others and not in you is called “projection.”
.....
The politics of fear and division are the politics of the conservatives. We Liberals prefer embracing others.
....
The Tea Party is basically a group of angry white people who can’t believe that we have elected an African American president. What do you think “We want our country back” means? It means that these people live in constant fear of becoming the minority, which is happening at an ever increasing rate. Being “American” no longer means “being white.” That scares these people and unites them in fear. Fear is the root of anger. It’s easy to stir fearful people into anger and then rage. It’s a dangerous political game that the Tea Party is playing. Our country has a sad history of political assassinations and violence. Almost exclusively the culprits are conservatives who fear change (Kennedy (s), Lincoln, etc.). Lincoln was killed because fearful angry conservative white people in the south didn’t want their former slaves, who happened to be black, free. That was a consequence of the Civil War. Lincoln was simply taking away the means of production and wealth for the South. It turned out that by doing that, he gave certain human beings their rights back while the whites lived in fear of backlash from the people they formerly enslaved.
.....
Today we have fearful angry white people who call themselves the Tea Party who really want to preserve their perceived place in American society. In this party there is talk of “revolution” “secession” and “rebellion.” It is a uniquely conservative movement spawned from fear of those perceived as “other” because of the color of their skin, their religion, and/or ethnic origin.
The Tea Party movement is nothing but a replay of old white fear sweeping up those susceptible into uniting around the fear that “that black man” is going to remove them

It's amazing how liberals think they are so morally and intellectually superior to anyone who disagrees with them, that they can write such pot-calling-kettle black screeds as this. Anyone can inject Freud to support his/her side of the argument - that is the magic of Freud's blanket theories. Funny, for example, how you speak of projection, while projecting....

mikey says

“A conservative is a man who has plenty of money and don’t see any reason why he shouldn’t always have plenty of money.”
Will Rogers
“Liberals feel unworthy of their possessions. Conservatives feel they deserve everything they’ve stolen.”
Mort Sahl

These statements, and the actual quoting of them, are quite telling regarding regarding liberal mentality.

Given the false assumption/premise that Conservatives are "rich" and Liberals are not, the second statement would be more accurate if it said: Liberals feel that Conservatives are unworthy of the possessions that they stole from Liberals.

The first statement is pretty interesting, given that it assumes either that Liberals do not have money, or that Liberals who have a lot of money believe that they shouldn't continue to have a lot of money, but does this actually bear out in reality?

Which is it? Conservatives are "rich" or conservatives are uneducated, lower-class rednecks? (Or maybe they spread across the spectrum much like liberals?). If the first statement were true, then why is one of the more current liberal arguments, including by the President himself, that conservative protesters are protesting against their own interests and they should "thank" the government for passing laws giving them more?

In reality, conservatives, at all income levels, are more likely to contribute (and contribute more) to charities/non-profits, than liberals. But since they don't like the government telling them exactly how to do it, they, along with anyone who may actually not be a conservative but is involved in the Tea Party movement for various reasons, are greedy people who deserve to be referred to by derogatory, homophobic names by open-minded, all-embracing liberals, who are of course, against "hateful" things...

Paralithodes says

In reality, conservatives, at all income levels, are more likely to contribute (and contribute more) to charities/non-profits, than liberals. But since they don’t like the government telling them exactly how to do it, they, along with anyone who may actually not be a conservative but is involved in the Tea Party movement for various reasons, are greedy people who deserve to be referred to by derogatory, homophobic names by open-minded, all-embracing liberals, who are of course, against “hateful” things…

Will we ever get past libs vs. conservative stereotypes here? It hasn't worked in the past - and detracts from any actual message the writer wants us to understand. Some people here say stuff with which I disagree - some say stuff with which I agree. It crosses political lines, by the way.

Tea parties are full of people who are angry about taxes, restrictive laws, etc. There are some crazy people who get all the press - and they are sponsored and represented by Faux news. They're being manipulated for a story in order for creeps like sean hannity to sell more books, get more popular, and spout half truths at best.

There's nothing wrong with protest, with standing up for what you believe in. But these people have been told who there enemy is and are being spoon fed their talking points. It's unfortunate, but it happens. However, they blame everything on Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi when in reality this train has been on the same track for years. They're being manipulated by media spin doctors.

Laura Bush just came out with a book claiming that George is a victim of the press (he flew over Katrinaland because he didn't want to stop traffic - where is she on the "heckuva job, Brownie" comment and the political appointment of him in the first place - or that he was fired and given a lucrative consulting position even though his direct orders contributed to many people's pain?). She calls Reid & Pelosi "graceless," funny coming from a woman married to a man whose command of the english language was laughable. She also spoke out about an accident she was in where she ran a stop sign when she was 17 years old. From an excerpt in the NY Times, she:

"...concedes that she and her friend were chatting when she ran the stop sign. But she also suggests a host of factors beyond her control played a role — the pitch-black road, an unusually dangerous intersection, the small size of the stop sign, and the car the victim was driving."
(http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/books/28laura.html?src=mv)

Yes, folks, in part she blames the fact that she killed a person because of the car he drove. She drove a huge-ass car, was well aware that the country road wasn't well-lit, the intersection didn't have the best of design (consistent with many country roads), and was talking with her friend rather than paying attention in spite of the conditions - but it's the fault of the corvair he drove.

And she has the gall to call others "graceless?"

This wealthy, priveleged woman who never had to work a day in her life, without a clue shouldn't have a forum for her ghost-writer to feed us such crap. But she does, and will be championed by faux news and her claims about her husband being a victim will become the darling of faux news. It should be labled as fiction, but it won't be.

The enquirer provides more truthful reporting that this.

(elliemae hops off her soapbox now)

elliemae says

Yes, folks, in part she blames the fact that she killed a person because of the car he drove. She drove a huge-ass car, was well aware that the country road wasn’t well-lit, the intersection didn’t have the best of design (consistent with many country roads), and was talking with her friend rather than paying attention in spite of the conditions - but it’s the fault of the corvair he drove.

You forgot the part about the stop sign being too small...

Liberal politicans invitations resonate with some peoples longings to get something for nothing, to live off of someones labor. The unwary and unconcerned citizen who feels needy for any reason, who remains ignorant or unconcerned of the economic implications of the welfare state and who retains a childlike disregard of the property rights of others takes the political bait just as naturally as an infant accepts his mommy's tit.

Of course, that type of response is entirely appropriate for an infant. But it is not appropriate for a responsible adult in a free society. But then again, who says liberals are responsible, or give a sh*t about a free society.

Honest Abe says

But then again, who says liberals are responsible, or give a sh*t about a free society.

Many, many people. Just not you.

"Eligibility for aid under TANF, as under AFDC, ends when the youngest child turns 18. Families with children under 18 years of age are UNAFFECTED BY THE IMPOSITION OF TIME LIMITS." [National Bureau of Economic Research].

"Besides, expectations that a mature citizen will take care of himself and not coerce others into that duty are consistent with the basic principal of FREEDOM. That no one is born into a world with a legally enforceable obligation to take care of persons other than his own offspring. In other words, citizenship in a free society should not entail a legal duty of care of others. It is tyranny that a statutory mandate requires you to adopt one or more persons deemed "deserving" by government officials." [The Structure of Liberty, Justice and the Rule of Law, Randy Barnett]

Conservatives donate far more than liberals to charitable causes. Liberals therefore do not put their money where there mouth is. Liberals want you to put YOUR money where THEIR mouth is. In spite of constant propaganda about the importance of "giving" to the poor, liberal politics undermines genuine charity at individual and community levels first by usurping their care taking activities through "centralized" welfare programs, and second by sending a message that discourages individual and local community charity... "Don't worry, big government is here to help you". As a direct result liberal government thus enslaves precisely the people they claim to "serve", thereby insuring future votes, for liberals, to keep the gravy train going.