The major corporation behind the grassroots Tea Party

[BVS]

Remember the left manufactures opinion so when the right does the same they get pissed off.

Any examples?

I still feel though that there are more "grassroots" with the right precisely because the general public doesn't have to know rocket science to understand that large debt = future taxes.

They worship Reagan although technically he increased Government more than any president in decades, but it was in military spending so it didn't count. You're right, definately not rocket scientists.

 

[PhilsFan]

These are the types of posts I'm talking about:

http://www.u2interference.com/forums/f199/the-tea-party-204770-21.html#post6710027

 

[purpleoscar]

Any examples?

MSM, Academia. Maybe you don't believe that's true but the right does. Anyways what is "manufactured opinion"? There are chattering classes on both sides trying to make aware the public what they think is important. It's impossible for the typical worker to take time out of work and create studies and experiments on their own. Most knowledge people get is from third parties and "experts" so debate is always there and the danger of indoctrination and demagoguery is always present. I mean another example would be community organizers.

http://www.aei.org/paper/20675

Reagan certainly tried to balance the best he could but he's only the president (I think without a line item veto).

They worship Reagan although technically he increased Government more than any president in decades, but it was in military spending so it didn't count. You're right, definately not rocket scientists.

I love how you forget the Democrat controlled congress, and the Soviet nightmare. If you can convince Europe to massively increase their arsenal and military spending then I can agree to the U.S. drastically reducing it's military budget. Good luck with that one. BTW Reagan reduced the top tax rate from 70% to 29% and excessive regulation and trade barriers. Anyways I don't see Obama and the Democrat controlled congress trying to compete in this territory nor even wanting to. They just want to increase spending even more and raise taxes. Eg. New Jersey before Christie. It took the Republican Congress to get Clinton on board to balance the budget for an ephemeral period of time, except this time the U.S. will have to do more than that and actually reduce overall debt. This may mean cancelling any wars if necessary on top of entitlement spending. The reason for reducing entitlement spending as opposed to military is that you don't have to sacrifice power to other dictators who have no electorate to answer for.

 

[BVS]

MSM, Academia. Maybe you don't believe that's true but the right does.

And it just makes you paranoid and delusional.

The right also believes Sarah Palin is an intelligent woman.

Anyways what is "manufactured opinion"?

Well for example finding some kook that believes acid rain is a hoax fund him and a few others in order to eventually build a group of acid rain deniers. Sound familiar?

It happened, what a waste of money.

I love how you forget the Democrat controlled congress, and the Soviet nightmare.

I love how you can almost always miss someone's point. He was not the great "less government" king that the right make him out to be.

 

[purpleoscar]

And it just makes you paranoid and delusional.

The right also believes Sarah Palin is an intelligent woman.

Well for example finding some kook that believes acid rain is a hoax fund him and a few others in order to eventually build a group of acid rain deniers. Sound familiar?

It happened, what a waste of money.

Oh like in Man Made Global warming? Nice try.

I love how you can almost always miss someone's point. He was not the great "less government" king that the right make him out to be.

No my point was to not blame a guy for not having all power to control a congress and not having all power to defeat the Soviets without competing with them. The left wants to erase the history of Reagan because they don't want a precedent to continue with other politicians. Even better if we can act as if Reagan and Obama are the same right?

 

[BVS]

Oh like in Man Made Global warming? Nice try.

History will prove once again how you folks are wrong So I guess you'll just have to wait.

No my point was to not blame a guy for not having all power to control a congress and not having all power to defeat the Soviets without competing with them. The left wants to erase the history of Reagan because they don't want a precedent to continue with other politicians. Even better if we can act as if Reagan and Obama are the same right?

You've strayed so far from my point that I have no clue what you're even talking about, are you trying some sleight of hand? Can't address the point so distract by waxing on and on about this other nonsense?

 

[purpleoscar]

History will prove once again how you folks are wrong So I guess you'll just have to wait.

Yeah you and James Cameron.

You've strayed so far from my point that I have no clue what you're even talking about, are you trying some sleight of hand? Can't address the point so distract by waxing on and on about this other nonsense?

That's usually what you say when I nail the point and you try to dodge. Reagan is not some left-wing radical big spender. Sometimes (like in WWII) you have to spend big to defeat totalitariansim but at some point the spending has to be dealt with and Republicans did that in the '90s. Clinton tried to take credit for it but it was Gingrich.

Anyways this is the past. I want to see what Obama and Pelosi have in mind. Probably energy taxes or a sales tax. Certainly Bush's tax cuts will expire.

 

[BVS]

So you don't believe that Reagan was spending big while cutting taxes?

 

[PhilsFan]

Clinton tried to take credit for it but it was Gingrich.

This made me laugh out loud.

 

[purpleoscar]

This made me laugh out loud.

He did try and take credit for it. He deserves credit for not trying to stop Congress but that's about it. Don't make me laugh out loud if you think Gingrich was following Clinton.

So you don't believe that Reagan was spending big while cutting taxes?

Boy you obviously don't get the Cold War or even WWII. Why do I even bother? Balancing a budget to lose a war is kind of pointless don't you think? Because the U.S. out spent on military to make the Soviets spread too thin it was worth the debt. The taxes were already too high and had to be lowered to increase production. During the 90s there was a balanced budget briefly but more should have been done. The Bush years were wasted because he pursued war and social spending at the same time while further lowering taxes and Obama is pursuing social spending ala Krugman which is even higher. This will mean taxes will have to be increased or a new congress will have to try and reduce spending. My bet is on increased taxes.

The problem with you is that you make a moral equvalency with military spending and social spending as if military consequences don't matter. The entire purpose of a military is to make your country a going concern.

 

[BVS]

Damn kid I'm not sure what posts you have been reading or what drugs you've been taking, no one said anything about moral equivalencies or losing wars to balance a budget.

No wonder the Tea Party has so many clueless followers...

 

[maycocksean]

Damn kid I'm not sure what posts you have been reading or what drugs you've been taking, no one said anything about moral equivalencies or losing wars to balance a budget.

No wonder the Tea Party has so many clueless followers...

It's just MHO but purpleoscar doesn't strike me as the Tea Party type exactly. He rightly pointed out how Bush tried to have it all ways, increasing both military and social spending while at the same time cutting taxes. That sentiment isn't quite Knee Jerk Right Wing.

 

[BVS]

It's just MHO but purpleoscar doesn't strike me as the Tea Party type exactly. He rightly pointed out how Bush tried to have it all ways, increasing both military and social spending while at the same time cutting taxes. That sentiment isn't quite Knee Jerk Right Wing.

I don't know exactly where Oscar stands on the Tea Party, I know that he has defended it a few times. My point is that when you have those that consider themselves the intellectual part of the far right and they get caught up in the "MSM" and that "higher education = communism" and can't address the bare bones of an argument without huge amounts of spin and rhetoric then it's easy to see how the less educated get sucked in without question.

 

[maycocksean]

I don't know exactly where Oscar stands on the Tea Party, I know that he has defended it a few times. My point is that when you have those that consider themselves the intellectual part of the far right and they get caught up in the "MSM" and that "higher education = communism" and can't address the bare bones of an argument without huge amounts of spin and rhetoric then it's easy to see how the less educated get sucked in without question.

I haven't always agreed with his conclusions, but I don't generally see him leading with the fear tactics and emotionalism and such.

The pickings are pretty thin these days with the conservative posters. I'd like to see him stick around.

 

[BVS]

I haven't always agreed with his conclusions, but I don't generally see him leading with the fear tactics and emotionalism and such.

No, but he's very quick to paint with huge generalizations and tow the line first and foremost.

The pickings are pretty thin these days with the conservative posters. I'd like to see him stick around.

I agree, I just wish he'd spend more time actually discussing the post he quotes...

Oscar, I think you're actually a really nice guy and mean well most of the time.

 

[nathan1977]

Moore to the Point by Russell D. Moore

An interesting article, written to Christians. Not all of his points are ones that will fly here in FYM, but here is at least someone trying to speak sense to the masses...

Some choice excerpts:

"Rather than cultivating a Christian vision of justice and the common good (which would have, by necessity, been nuanced enough to put us sometimes at odds with our political allies), we’ve relied on populist God-and-country sloganeering and outrage-generating talking heads. We’ve tolerated heresy and buffoonery in our leadership as long as with it there is sufficient political “conservatism” and a sufficient commercial venue to sell our books and products."

"Too often, and for too long, American “Christianity” has been a political agenda in search of a gospel useful enough to accommodate it. There is a liberation theology of the Left, and there is also a liberation theology of the Right, and both are at heart mammon worship. The liberation theology of the Left often wants a Barabbas, to fight off the oppressors as though our ultimate problem were the reign of Rome and not the reign of death. The liberation theology of the Right wants a golden calf, to represent religion and to remind us of all the economic security we had in Egypt. Both want a Caesar or a Pharaoh, not a Messiah."

 

[BVS]

It’s sad to see so many Christians confusing Mormon politics or American nationalism with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is the part that stands out to me the most. Beck has got it wrong, on SOOOO many levels, but I'm speaking purely from a Biblical perspective, he has it wrong. I'm not going to say Mormonism is contrary to the gospel, as Moore states, but I have noticed that many Mormon individuals confuse and recklessly place nationalism above the teachings of the Bible. It's a scary trend that I've noticed recently, but would like to find out more about...