Former Alaska governor Palin says she will run for president in 2012 "if there is nobody else to do it"

[TAWP]

Oy vey!

1.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this clause to mean that religion and government must stay separate for the benefit of both. The government holds no religious viewpoint and leaves all decisions about faith and religious practice to its citizens.

http://www.au.org/issues/why-church-state-separation.html

Yes, with tea party justices, they could interpret that differently. This reflects the long standing supreme court interpretation.

2. Marriage and the constitution. Remember, not long ago interracial American couples were denied the right to marry in the same way gays are denied today. But justice and equality prevailed under the law. Equality loving people want the same justice for gays, but electing Palin or her type would deeply damage such prospects.

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/08/the-conservative-case-for-gay-marriage.html

The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that marriage is one of the most fundamental rights that we have as Americans under our Constitution. It is an expression of our desire to create a social partnership, to live and share life's joys and burdens with the person we love, and to form a lasting bond and a social identity. The Supreme Court has said that marriage is a part of the Constitution's protections of liberty, privacy, freedom of association, and spiritual identification. In short, the right to marry helps us to define ourselves and our place in a community. Without it, there can be no true equality under the law.

It is true that marriage in this nation traditionally has been regarded as a relationship exclusively between a man and a woman, and many of our nation's multiple religions define marriage in precisely those terms. But while the Supreme Court has always previously considered marriage in that context, the underlying rights and liberties that marriage embodies are not in any way confined to heterosexuals.

3. Roe vs. Wade, of course if Palin or one of her types gets a pick or two, it will likely be overturned.

These items reflect my positions on those subjects. Don't expect a high level constitutional law discussion with me, or probably most anyone on this board. That, indeed, would be absurd.

Let me just make a note here:

Segregation laws (Jim Crow laws) where deemed unconstitutional by several circuit supreme courts.

The en-action of those laws was primarily done by Democrat officials. Republicans, the 'factory owners', rich 'northerners' etc, won the civil war.

The segregation in the US was despicable and I am glad that the courts went alongside the intent of the constitution.

[Gay] marriage is next issue that I hope the courts soon recognize is not of the government or churches concern and should be treated as a civil contract between two or more individuals. The government or churches can supply their pre-written contracts if they want to help people out, fine. But it is a civil contract between consenting adults and should be treated as such. Nothing in the constitution prohibits this. Or defines it as the union between a women or man only.

[TAWP]

And I fear the election of Palin as much as I fear it of Hillary.

[brahmburgers]

And I fear the election of Palin as much as I fear it of Hillary.

Pardon me for not reading the many posts on this topic, but in response to the above quote, I have to say I don't agree - though I usually agree with Tawp on most issues.

On the one hand I would encourage Palin to run, as she's an easy target and seems to relish putting her foot in her mouth. However, American voting trends are odd, to put it nicely, and even a malapropism-addled grandstander like Palin stands a chance to make to the highest office - albeit a slim chance.

Also, conservative folks (older & richer compared to average citizens) always vote in higher %'s than younger hip folks. Though national elections bring more of the lazy (younger, liberal) voters out, than regional elections, such as the US just had.

Hillary, to me, is an admirable person. Though it's trendy (and easy) to mock people in high places, I think she has a wealth of statesmenlike qualities. Though I'm quite liberal in many ways (member of the US Green party), I would have rather seen Hillary in the top spot than Obama.

[brahmburgers]

Are these Tea Party platform?!? What a bunch of hypocrites! BB"s comments in blue......

Illegal Aliens Are Here illegally. All the TP members are descendant from immigrants who would have been deemed illegal by today's laws

Special Interests Eliminated. All tea partiers have a slew of special interests!

Gun Ownership Is Sacred. Except when the gun is pointing at them or their precious kids

Government Must Be Downsized. Tea Partiers have truckloads of government spending which is sacrosant in their view. Start with SS for the rich, on through to PIK (payments to millionaire 'farmers' to not grow crops), on to veteran benefits, et al.

National Budget Must Be Balanced. Tea baggers are buddies with the biggest porkers in the federal trough

Deficit Spending Will End. same resonse as above

Bail-out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. Their heroes, Reagan and Bush Jr were giants on the bail-out bandwagons - when they had any chance to shovel money in to the laps of rich people and corporations. BTW, Ronald Reagan is responsible for the LARGEST TAX INCREASE in American history. If you don't believe me, look it up.

Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must. ...as long as the rich get richer, all is well with tea baggers

Intrusive Government Stopped. Tea party people are at the vanguard of intrusive government. Everyone should re-read the childhood story, "The Emperor Has No Clothes" - as it applies perfectly to the Tea Party

Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged. ....As long as it's Anglo, Right wing Bible thumping, anti-Darwinisn, and repeat-after-me Christian....

Conservative Self-Governance Unless the tea baggers themselves are needing handouts (back to PIK and hand-outs to Wall Street which Bush Jr. initiated)

[TAWP]

And I fear the election of Palin as much as I fear it of Hillary.

Pardon me for not reading the many posts on this topic, but in response to the above quote, I have to say I don't agree - though I usually agree with Tawp on most issues.

On the one hand I would encourage Palin to run, as she's an easy target and seems to relish putting her foot in her mouth. However, American voting trends are odd, to put it nicely, and even a malapropism-addled grandstander like Palin stands a chance to make to the highest office - albeit a slim chance.

Also, conservative folks (older & richer compared to average citizens) always vote in higher %'s than younger hip folks. Though national elections bring more of the lazy (younger, liberal) voters out, than regional elections, such as the US just had.

Hillary, to me, is an admirable person. Though it's trendy (and easy) to mock people in high places, I think she has a wealth of statesmenlike qualities. Though I'm quite liberal in many ways (member of the US Green party), I would have rather seen Hillary in the top spot than Obama.

To me they are two nuts from the same tree.

They might have different views on things, but neither ones solutions are any better than the other if taken as package-deals. Both might have redeeming features, but I rather have a candidate that is all good...

[hanuman1]

And I fear the election of Palin as much as I fear it of Hillary.

Pardon me for not reading the many posts on this topic, but in response to the above quote, I have to say I don't agree - though I usually agree with Tawp on most issues.

On the one hand I would encourage Palin to run, as she's an easy target and seems to relish putting her foot in her mouth. However, American voting trends are odd, to put it nicely, and even a malapropism-addled grandstander like Palin stands a chance to make to the highest office - albeit a slim chance.

Also, conservative folks (older & richer compared to average citizens) always vote in higher %'s than younger hip folks. Though national elections bring more of the lazy (younger, liberal) voters out, than regional elections, such as the US just had.

Hillary, to me, is an admirable person. Though it's trendy (and easy) to mock people in high places, I think she has a wealth of statesmenlike qualities. Though I'm quite liberal in many ways (member of the US Green party), I would have rather seen Hillary in the top spot than Obama.

To me they are two nuts from the same tree.

They might have different views on things, but neither ones solutions are any better than the other if taken as package-deals. Both might have redeeming features, but I rather have a candidate that is all good...

In your view, has there ever been a candidate that was 'all good'? If so, who?

[TAWP]

Are these Tea Party platform?!? What a bunch of hypocrites! BB"s comments in blue......

Illegal Aliens Are Here illegally. All the TP members are descendant from immigrants who would have been deemed illegal by today's laws

Special Interests Eliminated. All tea partiers have a slew of special interests!

Gun Ownership Is Sacred. Except when the gun is pointing at them or their precious kids

Government Must Be Downsized. Tea Partiers have truckloads of government spending which is sacrosant in their view. Start with SS for the rich, on through to PIK (payments to millionaire 'farmers' to not grow crops), on to veteran benefits, et al.

National Budget Must Be Balanced. Tea baggers are buddies with the biggest porkers in the federal trough

Deficit Spending Will End. same resonse as above

Bail-out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. Their heroes, Reagan and Bush Jr were giants on the bail-out bandwagons - when they had any chance to shovel money in to the laps of rich people and corporations. BTW, Ronald Reagan is responsible for the LARGEST TAX INCREASE in American history. If you don't believe me, look it up.

Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must. ...as long as the rich get richer, all is well with tea baggers

Intrusive Government Stopped. Tea party people are at the vanguard of intrusive government. Everyone should re-read the childhood story, "The Emperor Has No Clothes" - as it applies perfectly to the Tea Party

Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged. ....As long as it's Anglo, Right wing Bible thumping, anti-Darwinisn, and repeat-after-me Christian....

Conservative Self-Governance Unless the tea baggers themselves are needing handouts (back to PIK and hand-outs to Wall Street which Bush Jr. initiated)

Sadely, you and Jingthing attack a red herring.

Those lines might be along the lines of Palins views, but they are not those of the Tea Party Movement, per se.

(Some are shared, sure.)

After releasing the 21 ideas at CPAC on February 18, 2010, a final online vote was held to narrow the 21 ideas down to the final 10 to be included in the Contract from America. Over two months, 454,331 votes were cast. The resulting document, including the vote percentages for the statements, was posted online on April 12, 2010.

The Contract lists 10 agenda items that it encourages congressional candidates to follow:

1. Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the U.S. Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does. (82.03%)

2. Reject emissions trading: Stop the "cap and trade" administrative approach used to control carbon dioxide emissions by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of carbon dioxide. (72.20%)

3. Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification. (69.69%)

4. Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the Internal Revenue Code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution. (64.9%)

5. Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (63.37%)

6. Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%)

7. Repeal the healthcare legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Work towards the repudiating the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (56.39%)

8. Pass an 'All-of-the-Above' Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (55.5%)

9. Reduce Earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%)

10. Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend current temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011. (53.38%)

The other list is the fictional work by...who?

[TAWP]

And I fear the election of Palin as much as I fear it of Hillary.

Pardon me for not reading the many posts on this topic, but in response to the above quote, I have to say I don't agree - though I usually agree with Tawp on most issues.

On the one hand I would encourage Palin to run, as she's an easy target and seems to relish putting her foot in her mouth. However, American voting trends are odd, to put it nicely, and even a malapropism-addled grandstander like Palin stands a chance to make to the highest office - albeit a slim chance.

Also, conservative folks (older & richer compared to average citizens) always vote in higher %'s than younger hip folks. Though national elections bring more of the lazy (younger, liberal) voters out, than regional elections, such as the US just had.

Hillary, to me, is an admirable person. Though it's trendy (and easy) to mock people in high places, I think she has a wealth of statesmenlike qualities. Though I'm quite liberal in many ways (member of the US Green party), I would have rather seen Hillary in the top spot than Obama.

To me they are two nuts from the same tree.

They might have different views on things, but neither ones solutions are any better than the other if taken as package-deals. Both might have redeeming features, but I rather have a candidate that is all good...

In your view, has there ever been a candidate that was 'all good'? If so, who?

There have been several that is 'good enough to basically be all good', in the last election it was candidate Ron Paul.

[Jimi007]

Seriously I think America should turn their back on the two parties; they have become a total farce.

A total boycott on voting for dems or reps would be a fresh air for a country which currently at the brink of collapse.

I have to agree, it's just gotten stupid! But there's too much money involved to ever really change. As A friend wrote me recently, why can't we just vote online and let the people decide what laws and budgets should be passed. Who needs these paid for politicians that have an agenda that's bought and paid for by multinational corporations and defense contractors? What happened to the peoples representatives? The two party system has done a fine job of screwing the majority of Americans, while CEO's like Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina tried to buy their way into office... Luckily they FAILED. I have personally met both of them and I didn't think much of either one of them. They took their golden parachute and ran... For office.

[A_Traveller]

Are these Tea Party platform?!? What a bunch of hypocrites! BB"s comments in blue......

Illegal Aliens Are Here illegally. All the TP members are descendant from immigrants who would have been deemed illegal by today's laws

Special Interests Eliminated. All tea partiers have a slew of special interests!

Gun Ownership Is Sacred. Except when the gun is pointing at them or their precious kids

Government Must Be Downsized. Tea Partiers have truckloads of government spending which is sacrosant in their view. Start with SS for the rich, on through to PIK (payments to millionaire 'farmers' to not grow crops), on to veteran benefits, et al.

National Budget Must Be Balanced. Tea baggers are buddies with the biggest porkers in the federal trough

Deficit Spending Will End. same resonse as above

Bail-out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. Their heroes, Reagan and Bush Jr were giants on the bail-out bandwagons - when they had any chance to shovel money in to the laps of rich people and corporations. BTW, Ronald Reagan is responsible for the LARGEST TAX INCREASE in American history. If you don't believe me, look it up.

Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must. ...as long as the rich get richer, all is well with tea baggers

Intrusive Government Stopped. Tea party people are at the vanguard of intrusive government. Everyone should re-read the childhood story, "The Emperor Has No Clothes" - as it applies perfectly to the Tea Party

Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged. ....As long as it's Anglo, Right wing Bible thumping, anti-Darwinisn, and repeat-after-me Christian....

Conservative Self-Governance Unless the tea baggers themselves are needing handouts (back to PIK and hand-outs to Wall Street which Bush Jr. initiated)

Sadely, you and Jingthing attack a red herring.

Those lines might be along the lines of Palins views, but they are not those of the Tea Party Movement, per se.

(Some are shared, sure.)

Well the list comes from the website Teaparty.org, which was linked in the original post, but elided [LINK] I was under the impression that Dale Robertson was viewed, at least until his 'N' word poster, one of the 'founders' per se.

Regards

Edited November 5, 2010 by A_Traveller

[A_Traveller]

@TWAP the 'fiction' is from a document raised by a Texan Attorney Ron Heckler, I think prior to the '09 Tea Party activities. Tea Party Patriots, self described, asked for both Democrats and Republicans to sign up to this. I think the Republican rebuttal was called the Pledge to America.

But I have a feeling you knew that.

I suppose one advantage of apparently not having a C3 operation is it makes it convenient to describe those within the movement with whom one doesn't agree as 'fake' Tea Party Patriots [or maybe they are just coffee drinkers].

Regards

Edited November 5, 2010 by A_Traveller

[TAWP]

The point is that the list I posted (that you removed in your quote of my post) is the preferred list, and nothing else.

As you can see, the focus is on limiting the government, not pushing them into peoples bedrooms etc like some posters seem to think...

[A_Traveller]

No the point is that this movement is unfocused, irrational, and driven by fear. It has no idea what it wants, and has little understanding of the 21st century.

Regards

PS To add I elided since I wanted to reply specifically to the second list. In fact looking back you seem to be saying [reviewing your subsequent comments] the second list is real, and the first is fake, I think, the quotes make it unclear to me.

Edited November 5, 2010 by A_Traveller

[TAWP]

No the point is that this movement is unfocused, irrational, and driven by fear. It has no idea what it wants, and has little understanding of the 21st century.

Regards

So you removed the list that was voted forward so you can claim that they don't know what they want?

With that logic then no party or movement does...

[A_Traveller]

@TWAP you have a quicker connexion than I, so I apper to be replying to the post before rather than the one above.

Hope it is now clearer.

Regards

[TAWP]

Btw, I should point out that http://www.teaparty.org/ is NOT any official Tea Party Movement website, it is a private persons 'Tea Party' website, aka a 'Party' he formed. Perhaps that adds to your confusement [and the misuse of his list].

[TAWP]

Yes, the first list is 'fake' as it is from a 'Tea Party' site, set up by Dale Robertson, to form a 'Tea Party'.

Not the movements adopted list nor is he directly affiliated...apart from gaining donations due to confusements, I'm sure...

[A_Traveller]

In my view the Tea Party Movement or whatever they call themselves after Americans for Prosperity & FreedomWorks pull the funding is nothing more or less than a response based on fear and a lack of understanding. The Republican Party really can't afford these people [after all they cost them seats], and as is often the case in such movements there's a profound lack of knowledge about the core subjects in hand.

Now FreedomWorks, perhaps ironically named, in a draft of a confidential memo to be distributed to all incoming House Republicans, Dick Armey, a former Republican majority leader who is chairman of the FreedomWorks, and Matt Kibbe, its president, told lawmakers that a repeal of the Democrats’ health care law was “nonnegotiable” and warned that they would face a severe backlash from voters if they did not succeed in reversing the law.

“Politically speaking, your only choice is to get on offense and start moving boldly ahead to repeal, replace and defund Obamacare in 2011, or risk rejection by the voters in 2012,” Mr. Armey and Mr. Kibbe wrote.

Hm... in other words, the Tea Party [or whatever follows it] is nothing more than an AstroTurf glove round a cudgel.

By being a movement it has the advantages of accessing public opinion, but none of the responsibilities inherent in being a lawmaker and managing a country. It's odd really isn't it after all the original Tea Party was all about the creation of government [e.g. no taxation without represenatation] rather then less.

This is about harking back to some 'golden age' when life was less complex, but the world has moved on. Equally, what happens when Republicans push forward with agendas such as pushing for additional spending and reduced revenue for the next two years over what is the current situation and plan. After all, there are those who intend to try to stop President Obama from bringing an end to the Afghanistan war in 2011. That war costs $80 Billion per year.

Second, the Republicans are pushing to make the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans permanent. Those tax cuts cost $70 Billion per year. So, before anything else has happened, Republicans are advocating for an increase in the deficit for the time between now and election day in 2012 by some $220 Billion dollars. Republicans would have to find that amount of cuts to take effect in the next two years just to offset what they are already proposing.

How will that play with TP and friends....

Now it is possible that these things will fail in the political activity, but there's a strong tension there.

Regards

Edited November 5, 2010 by A_Traveller

[TAWP]

'tax cuts for the wealthiest' - *sigh* such a socialist slogan. Never-mind that they already pay far more in both amount and percentage than most people. But sadly it is only possible to increase taxes, not decrease them, or one is 'evil' in some simpletons eyes.

And therein lies the problem...

[Jingthing]

For anyone naive enough not to realize that the American tea party is an extremist right wing movement, perhaps you need to turn away from "Professor" Beck (grand tea party leader) of Fox News for a moment, and get some "magazine learnin'." This isn't a joke. They say they are trying to take back the country. To what exactly? The McCarthy era, or worse? The signs of their potentially fascist obnoxiousness are everywhere, especially their red baiting of our center left (and not coincidentally African-American) president who they insist is a communist.

As informed people understand, Beckian Tea Partyism is nothing new in America. It is the latest refurbished version of the same old hate and paranoia and yes racism from the extreme right wing that we have seen so many times in the past. The modern version guys are at least smart enough not to parade wearing sheets. These tea party extremist zealots are now installed in Washington and think they can take total power.

Beck’s version of American history relies on lessons from his own acknowledged inspiration, the late right-wing writer W. Cleon Skousen, and also restates charges made by the Birch Society’s founder, Robert Welch. The political universe is, of course, very different today from what it was during the Cold War. Yet the Birchers’ politics and their view of American history—which focussed more on totalitarian threats at home than on those posed by the Soviet Union and Communist China—has proved remarkably persistent. The pressing historical question is how extremist ideas held at bay for decades inside the Republican Party have exploded anew—and why, this time, Party leaders have done virtually nothing to challenge those ideas, and a great deal to abet them

...

The popularity of Beck’s broadcasts, which now reach two million viewers each day, has brought neo-Birchite ideas to an audience beyond any that Welch or Skousen might have dreamed of. Several times a week, Beck informs his audience that socialists (whom he also sometimes calls Fascists or Communists) led by Obama have seized power, and that patriotic Americans must take their country back. His TV show for some time featured “Comrade Updates,” in which Beck described perfidy while the Soviet anthem played in the background. He attacks all the familiar bogeymen: the Federal Reserve System (which he asserts is a private conglomerate, unaccountable to the public); the Council on Foreign Relations (born of a “progressive idea” to manipulate the media in order to “let the masses know what should be done”); and a historical procession of evildoers, including Skousen’s old target Colonel House and Welch’s old target Woodrow Wilson. His sources on these matters, quite apart from Skousen’s books, can be unreliable. On September 22nd, amid a diatribe about House, Beck cited a passage from “Secrets of the Federal Reserve,” by Eustace Mullins. The book, commissioned in 1948 by Ezra Pound, is a startlingly anti-Semitic fantasy of how a Jewish-led conspiracy of all-powerful bankers established the Federal Reserve in service of their plot to dominate the world.

In 1906, early in the Progressive era, the humorist Finley Peter Dunne’s fictional barroom sage, Mr. Dooley, put the social and political tumult of the day into perspective. “Th’ noise ye hear is not th’ first gun iv a revolution,” Dooley remarked. “It’s on’y th’ people iv th’ United States batin’ a carpet.” A century from now, or even a year from now, Americans may say the same about the Tea Party. For the moment, though, it appears that the extreme right wing is on the verge of securing a degree of power over Congress and the Republican Party that is unprecedented in modern American history. For defenders of national cohesion and tempered adversity in our politics, it is an alarming state of affairs

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/18/101018fa_fact_wilentz#ixzz14SN15H3f

Edited November 6, 2010 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Why do you keep insisting that anyone cares about anything that Glen Beck says? Most people on both sides think he needs to take some serious meds.

[Jingthing]

Why do you keep insisting that anyone cares about anything that Glen Beck says? Most people on both sides think he needs to take some serious meds.

Nice try, but wrong.

For the fractious Tea Party movement, Beck—a former drive-time radio jockey, a recovering alcoholic, and a Mormon convert—has emerged as both a unifying figure and an intellectual guide. One opinion poll, released in July by Democracy Corps, showed that he is “the most highly regarded individual among Tea Party supporters,” seen not merely as an entertainer, like Rush Limbaugh, but as an “educator.” And in the past few months Beck has established his own institute of learning: the online, for-profit Beck University. Enrollees can take courses like Faith 102, which contends with “revisionists and secular progressives” about the separation of church and state; Hope 102, an attack on the activist federal government; and the combined Charity 101/102/103, a highly restrictive interpretation of rights, federalism, and the division of powers.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/18/101018fa_fact_wilentz?currentPage=1#ixzz14SUZ4ah0

At a tea party event --

Predictable political tea party people sentiment --

Edited November 6, 2010 by Jingthing

[geriatrickid]

Beck and Palin should give Obama another 4 years as everyone's favourite President to hate.

[Starlifter]

Darn, I had a brilliant reply condemning those who condemn Palin however, it disappeared during spell check. Must be an omen.

[geriatrickid]

Darn, I had a brilliant reply condemning those who condemn Palin however, it disappeared during spell check. Must be an omen.

Maybe the word Palin" is considered an error and so the spellcheck just trashes the error.

[cdnvic]

Several posts removed. As I said, derogatory nicknames for others' political beliefs are not welcome here. If you can't articulate your position without getting rude, just keep it to yourself.

[brahmburgers]

Politically, I'm so left-of-center, that I probably go full circle and come 'round right of the arch-conservative right wingers. They talk about cutting government, but they really don't have the guts to really cut unnecessary and wasteful programs. I would, but I'll never be in a position of power to do so. Indeed, even the #1 most powerful person in the US, the president, has a tough time getting his ideas to manifest in actionable programs.

I could never be president because, though I'm an American, I was born in Denmark (hence, my Thaivisa tag; 'danish pastry member'). But seriously folks, the US is facing a more dire predicament than the near Wall Street meltdown of 2008. The biggest fear at that time was giant US corporations being revealed for what they are - floating on tens of billions of promissory paper and a bit of other peoples' money - ....and a run on the banks.

Banks only need to have 3% of the money they claim to have, or (to put it another way) 3% of the money they leverage. In other words, they leverage (think: giant roulette wheel) 97% of money they pretend to have, but don't really have. Assuming they're honest in their bookkeeping, which they're not - so they probably leverage well over 100% of the assets they claim to have.

The Feds (led by Bush Jr, and now Obama) should have let Wall Street fry in its own fat. In the real world, if a company does bad business, it goes down, and a better run company usually comes along to take it's niche. In the fantasy world of Wall Street and Wash.DC, a poorly run company can never fail, because Uncle Sam is always there to shovel tens of billions of greenbacks in to its lap.

The Tea Party pretends it can put responsible values back in the equation, but it can't and won't. Its members are too deeply embedded in the very system it claims is corrupt. It would be like cutting off your fingers to eat - if you're hungry. It won't happen. Not even a little bit.

[TAWP]

For anyone naive enough not to realize that the American tea party is an extremist right wing movement, perhaps you need to turn away from "Professor" Beck (grand tea party leader) of Fox News for a moment, and get some "magazine learnin'." This isn't a joke. They say they are trying to take back the country. To what exactly? The McCarthy era, or worse? The signs of their potentially fascist obnoxiousness are everywhere, especially their red baiting of our center left (and not coincidentally African-American) president who they insist is a communist.

As informed people understand, Beckian Tea Partyism is nothing new in America. It is the latest refurbished version of the same old hate and paranoia and yes racism from the extreme right wing that we have seen so many times in the past. The modern version guys are at least smart enough not to parade wearing sheets. These tea party extremist zealots are now installed in Washington and think they can take total power.

The most scary might be that some people actually believe the above and aren't just using it as propaganda in the same vein as Beck vs Obama and his socialist.

[Jingthing]

The tea party people UNTIL NOW have not held any actual, adult, offices.

Now they do.

What I have observed from the tea party people apologists is a game playing of plausible deniability. As a "movement" without any officially elected leader, when opponents point out the dangerous/offensive/repression oriented (the opposite of "freedom") views of some of the most visible tea party celebs like Palin and Beck, they wiggle out of it by saying, we have no leaders, those views don't reflect the "real" agenda of the tea party. So you see the snake-like game they are playing? The supporters are cherry picking from a long list of tea party agendas that they personally find more benign and appealing (for them they are the "real" agenda) and distancing themselves from the more offensive ones (like Palin's activism to actively oppress gay people by pushing for an anti-gay constitutional amendment).

Now that the tea party has grown up and possesses real power, will they do the responsible thing and make it clear exactly what their agenda is, or will they continue playing this game so supporters can create their own fantasy about exactly what the movement is all about? I reckon the latter, which in addition to previous comments I've made, should make reasonable people very wary.

[Jingthing]

The most scary might be that some people actually believe the above and aren't just using it as propaganda in the same vein as Beck vs Obama and his socialist.

So I guess we are scared of each other then, eh? Yes, the tea party is a scary movement. Just look at history, what happens when right wing extremist groups rise in times of economic crisis.