Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-04-2012, 11:50 PM
 
11,531 posts, read 10,286,380 times
Reputation: 3580

Advertisements

Bye bye teabaggers

Quote:
But a recent email from TeaParty.org asking for donations to Walker's campaign claims that Walker is "one of" the controversial group's "sponsors"—a claim the Walker campaign vehemently denies.

The group, which is also known as the 1776 Tea Party, was founded by Dale Robertson, who famously showed up at a Houston tea party rally in 2009 carrying a sign that said, "Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = N***r."
Walker Campaign Disavows Controversial Tea Party Group | Mother Jones
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-05-2012, 03:39 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,191,594 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post


I would disavow that tea party as well, and i am in the local tea party.

I just dont support the republican ideals, but I do support limited goverment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2012, 11:24 PM
 
Location: west mich
5,739 posts, read 6,931,116 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
I would disavow that tea party as well, and i am in the local tea party.
I just dont support the republican ideals, but I do support limited goverment.
Nothing wrong with "limited govt", but it must be more clearly defined than that. Why is Wall Street malfeasance off the tea party radar - it is they who caused this recession, not teachers, janitors, and their unions. Working people had nothing to do with the crash or the deficit, yet the tea party says nothing about Wall Street. Why - because Rove, the Kochs, Murdoch established and bankrolled the movement.
What do tea partiers have in common with these billionaires, who would not allow one of them in their back door?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2012, 12:28 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,471,329 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by detwahDJ View Post
Nothing wrong with "limited govt", but it must be more clearly defined than that. Why is Wall Street malfeasance off the tea party radar - it is they who caused this recession, not teachers, janitors, and their unions. Working people had nothing to do with the crash or the deficit, yet the tea party says nothing about Wall Street. Why - because Rove, the Kochs, Murdoch established and bankrolled the movement.
What do tea partiers have in common with these billionaires, who would not allow one of them in their back door?
uhm

wall street had very little to do with the crash

government intervention and policy was/is the main culprit

what was the two main causes of the crash.....lack of jobs, and a real estate bubble

jobs started leaving with nafta/cafta and the dozens of other 'freetrade' agrrements to include OFTA,,which is obamas free trade agreement with oman

the housing bubble..started in 1995 with clinton changing the mortgage rules


why wont liberal admit, the they and their globalist policies caused the problem...and they take their orders from the billioniare soros
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 08:12 AM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,167,332 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by detwahDJ View Post
Nothing wrong with "limited govt", but it must be more clearly defined than that. Why is Wall Street malfeasance off the tea party radar - it is they who caused this recession, not teachers, janitors, and their unions. Working people had nothing to do with the crash or the deficit, yet the tea party says nothing about Wall Street. Why - because Rove, the Kochs, Murdoch established and bankrolled the movement.
What do tea partiers have in common with these billionaires, who would not allow one of them in their back door?
You forget that much of what got them upset was the bail-out of Wall Street. They got their name because of sending Tea Bags to Congress in opposition to TARP.

There are those who wanted to use the label for their own agenda, no doubt. Just like there were those who wanted to use the OWS positions even though they had no intention of ever addressing them.

Those who were upset then are indeed still upset today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 08:17 AM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,167,332 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
uhm

wall street had very little to do with the crash
I have no idea how anyone can say this with a straight face.

Quote:
government intervention and policy was/is the main culprit
None of it works unless Wall Street works with it hand in hand.

Quote:
what was the two main causes of the crash.....lack of jobs, and a real estate bubble
Who was it betting on real estate? Was it not that Goldman Sachs was selling mortgage securities that they were promoting as good investments that they knew was crap and were actually betting against them, not a big part of the problem?

Did the fact that these assets were being greatly misrepresented as to their value on the books not a big part of the problem?

Quote:
jobs started leaving with nafta/cafta and the dozens of other 'freetrade' agrrements to include OFTA,,which is obamas free trade agreement with oman
Much supported by Wall Street. No?

Quote:
the housing bubble..started in 1995 with clinton changing the mortgage rules


why wont liberal admit, the they and their globalist policies caused the problem...and they take their orders from the billioniare soros
Likely for the same reason you are only willing to blame one side. Pot-kettle
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 10:10 AM
 
46,259 posts, read 27,074,383 times
Reputation: 11113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post
Here is the beginning of that paragraph, why would you knowingly take a paragraph out of context....

Oh wait, a liberal spin.....to fit your version....

Quote:
Even other tea party groups are leery of associating with TeaParty.org.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 10:14 AM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,848,638 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post
So a political campaign doesn't want to be linked to a questionable website? Wow, that's some really amazing reporting you got there Mother Jones. What a change from the normal reporting that the Mother Jones website provides it's completely unbiased followers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 12:07 PM
 
3,045 posts, read 3,191,946 times
Reputation: 1307
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
uhm

wall street had very little to do with the crash government intervention and policy was/is the main culprit what was the two main causes of the crash.....lack of jobs, and a real estate bubble

jobs started leaving with nafta/cafta and the dozens of other 'freetrade' agrrements to include OFTA,,which is obamas free trade agreement with oman. the housing bubble..started in 1995 with clinton changing the mortgage rules

why wont liberal admit, the they and their globalist policies caused the problem...and they take their orders from the billioniare soros


That said, your entire post is flawed. Liberals and their globalist policies? It's a global economy. Politicians of all beliefs support free trade and globalism. That's why both the Canadian Prime Minister and the American President who signed NAFTA into law were conservative. There's a deadweight loss to trade when it comes to protectionism.

Wall Street had nothing to do with the recession? Given that they fund the daily operations of countries all over the country, that's entirely false.

Banks rolling poorly documented, non-traditional loan instruments into mortgage backed securities to get around leverage requirements and then further divesting risk by buying credit default swaps mostly all from one company was mostly why the financial system went crazy. Pretty much all of the safeguards in the system were avoided by doing all of the above.

Add in to that what Greenspan admitted was a mistake. Interest rates had been dropped for a prolonged period of time and this greatly led to the real estate bubble. It also took away the easiest way to stimulate the economy in the case of a recession.

You can add in to that the federal government decision in 2004 to remove state oversight to things like investment banks.

Unemployment was still low at the start of the Great Recession in 2007. When the banks started having real issues, companies pulled back on their spending, the real estate industry and construction industry stopped, capital markets dried up and unemployment was the result.

Perhaps the working class hero should leave complex financial discussions to the white collar heroes. I'll drop you a note if I need my car fixed though. I haven't bothered to learn any of that.

Last edited by CaseyB; 06-11-2012 at 10:53 AM.. Reason: rude
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 12:12 PM
 
Location: west mich
5,739 posts, read 6,931,116 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
You forget that much of what got them upset was the bail-out of Wall Street. They got their name because of sending Tea Bags to Congress in opposition to TARP.
There are those who wanted to use the label for their own agenda, no doubt. Just like there were those who wanted to use the OWS positions even though they had no intention of ever addressing them.
Those who were upset then are indeed still upset today.
You post is quite fair. Yes originally they did, but now if you listen to them they are supporting the goals of their billionaire backers.
Now a reason for Fox to report this, if they do, would be if their previous backers have no further use for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
uhm

wall street had very little to do with the crash

government intervention and policy was/is the main culprit

what was the two main causes of the crash.....lack of jobs, and a real estate bubble

jobs started leaving with nafta/cafta and the dozens of other 'freetrade' agrrements to include OFTA,,which is obamas free trade agreement with oman

the housing bubble..started in 1995 with clinton changing the mortgage rules


why wont liberal admit, the they and their globalist policies caused the problem...and they take their orders from the billioniare soros
Jeez, double-spaced Fox slogans repeated yet again. Clinton, the Dems, Soros, Carter, "liberal" media WHATEVER - the great power structure responsible for everything bad.
* Repub "Hands off" Wall Street allowed them to gamble with people's money, lose, then threaten to crash the economy. They got the money then gave themselves bonuses. I have yet to figure why conservatives support this - conservative media doesn't speak against it. It could be "more power to you" money mindset no matter how you get it.
* The "globalists" are repub outsourcers, killing Democratic measures to bring jobs back to America. Foreign trading "partners" practicing protectionism which repubs either embrace or don't care about. Fox not reporting this?
* Soros & other money support is much different than media scripts, talking points and policies handed down from Republican Central's secret meetings (Rove, the Kochs, ---). BTW, in case Fox didn't tell you, Democrats have as much right to monetary support as Repubs. Financial support, left at that, is a different issue than the simplistic top-down control and policy guidance of friendly allies like Rove and billionaire investors - a system favored by the conservative psyche.
* Outsourcing of jobs did not start with Obama. It started with rewarding businesses to do so through actual tax breaks. Democrats now trying, through legislation, to reward bringing jobs back and being obstructed by repubs. No Fox report on this?
* So Clinton not so liberal after all? NAFTA ws a republican proposal reported by bellowing conservative media as "stolen" from them by Clinton. How dare he take credit for their proposal. Fair-and-balanced Fox should refresh your memory on this.
Face it, the worse off repubs can help make the country, the better for them at election time (unless people stop relying on Fox for "information").

Last edited by detwahDJ; 06-10-2012 at 12:24 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top