Survey’s surprising finding: tea party less popular than atheists and Muslims [Archive]

Hotspring 44

08-18-2011, 03:13 AM

Survey’s surprising finding: tea party less popular than atheists and Muslims (https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/survey-surprising-finding-tea-party-less-popular-atheists-160220531.html)

<cite></cite>
<cite>By </cite>[I]Rachel Rose Hartman (https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/author/rachel-rose-hartman/;_ylt=AjWMVrncTzcAkUALOfzZsiqbCMZ_;_ylu=X3oDMTBuczdyMGVuBHBvcwM1BHNlYwNNZWRpYUJsb2dIZWFk;_ylg=X3oDMTNjZWwwc3JjBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDMjBh MzY4MGMtMDRkMy0zNDM0LWIyMmUtMDU1NGQxZmUxYTZiBHBzdGNhdANvcmlnaW5hbHN8dGhldGlja2V0BHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0Aw--;_ylv=3)<cite> | </cite>The Ticket (https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/)<cite></cite>
<cite></cite>

In an op-ed article in the New York Times, Robert D. Putnam, a professor of public policy at Harvard, and David E. Campbell, a political scientist at Notre Dame, say they have collected data indicating that the tea party is "less popular than much maligned groups like 'atheists' and 'Muslims.'" (https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-tea-party.html)

But Campbell says the tea party was really an afterthought in their research.

"We didn't go into this study to look at the tea party," Campbell said in an interview with The Ticket.

The professors were following up on research they conducted in 2006 and 2007 for their book "American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us" and decided to add the tea party and atheists to their list of survey queries. By going back to many of the same respondents, the professors gleaned several interesting facts about the tea party.

One of their more surprising findings, Campbell concedes, (and one drawing national attention) is that the tea party drew a lower approval rating than Muslims and atheists. That put the tea party below 23 other entries--including Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, Republicans and Democrats--that the professors included on their survey of "a representative sample of 3,000 Americans."

By examining which respondents became supporters of the tea party, Campbell and Putnam's survey "casts doubt on the tea party's 'origin story,' " they write in the Times--though, in fairness, it's perhaps difficult to generalize on the movement's origins from a poll sample of 3,000 respondents.

Early tea partiers were described as "nonpartisan political neophytes," Campbell and Putnam write, but their findings showed that tea partiers were "highly partisan Republicans" who were more likely than others to have contacted government officials.

"They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do," they went on.

In addition to being socially conservative, the study found a close tie between religion and the tea party, whose supporters seek out "deeply religious" elected officials.

"This helps to explain why candidates like Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry are just as much about the public presentation of themselves as religious people as fiscal conservatives," Campbell told The Ticket.

Campbell said Tuesday that he does not regard his research as politically motivated. "I don't have a particular dog in this or any other political fight," he said.

"We actually didn't go into this study primarily to look at the tea party," he told the Ticket. "The primary purpose of the study is to update what we learned about religion in America."
<cite></cite>
<cite></cite>

Speak2Truth

08-22-2011, 08:44 PM

Unsurprisingly, "popularity" is mainly a measure of the effects of gossip.

The mainstream media work sooo hard to smear the TEA Party while putting the warm 'n fuzzy all over the Muslims. They "smear" because it works on the weak-minded.

By the way - there are a lot of atheists in the TEA Party. There are Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Teachers' Union members... but probably not any Communists. So, the title of this article indicates some serious ignorance.

zenekar

08-22-2011, 10:26 PM

Unsurprisingly, "popularity" is mainly a measure of the effects of gossip.

The mainstream media work sooo hard to smear the TEA Party while putting the warm 'n fuzzy all over the Muslims. They "smear" because it works on the weak-minded.

By the way - there are a lot of atheists in the TEA Party. There are Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Teachers' Union members... but probably not any Communists. So, the title of this article indicates some serious ignorance.

The only ignorance I detect in this forum is yours. The tea party is financed by the billionaire thieves you defend. US citizens who were fooled before are becoming wise to what these corporate hoodlums are up to and are abandoning the tea party charade. What is your purpose in this forum -- calling people socialist and communists? Drink some herbal tea and calm yourself.

Speak2Truth

08-22-2011, 11:03 PM

The only ignorance I detect in this forum is yours. The tea party is financed by the billionaire thieves you defend. US citizens who were fooled before are becoming wise to what these corporate hoodlums are up to and are abandoning the tea party charade. What is your purpose in this forum -- calling people socialist and communists? Drink some herbal tea and calm yourself.

Are you trying to deflect attention away from the billionaire financier of the Democrat Party, who happens to be the beneficiary of a great deal of Obama's wealth redistribution? He sure made out when Obama chased our oil producers out of the Gulf then invited Brazil's Petrobras (a Soros investment) to come tap our oil off the coast of Louisiana.

The TEA Party is growing because Americans are increasingly angry at the Socialist charade that is draining our nation's economy and taking us down the path to ruin. If you've attended TEA Party events you'll see they lack the multi-million dollar polish of the billionaire-funded Socialist Democrat Party events.

They're just a lot of people who have been Taxed Enough Already.

They're getting mad as hell and they're not going to take it any more.

Here's an interesting look at the conflict between the taxpayers (TEA Party) and the tax-takers...

https://usobserver.com/featured/sayre/sayre-archive.html

Scroll down to the video. I appreciate that people are taking the time to document this important period of American history and show us what is really destroying American liberty and prosperity.

Hotspring 44

08-23-2011, 12:31 PM

The TEA Party is growing because Americans are increasingly angry at the Socialist charade that is draining our nation's economy and taking us down the path to ruin. If you've attended TEA Party events you'll see they lack the multi-million dollar polish of the billionaire-funded Socialist Democrat Party events.
Ahem, the way you say things is as if there isn't anything on the conservative side which is similar. I think you're cherry picking here.
Here is an example of conservative “oil tycoons” doing the same (I think even to a greater degree) sort of things as you referred to as; “charade”.

<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> Few in America had heard about the third-richest Americans, brothers David and Charles Koch, until just recently....

... For decades, they were under the radar. They and their father had amassed an incredible fortune, mainly in the oil business. Their privately held company revenues last year were estimated at $100 billion. Each brother is worth $21.5 billion. That is a very big “B” in both cases....

... For many years, they have been involved in politics but not terribly open or transparent about it. It is true that David Koch ran as vice president on the 1980 Libertarian ticket, to the right of Ronald Reagan. According to [I]New York Times columnist Frank Rich (https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html), “his campaign called for the abolition not just of Social Security, federal regulatory agencies and welfare but also of the FBI, the CIA, and public schools.” Since the Libertarian party’s 1 percent showing in 1980, David Koch has very much been behind the scenes, until now. [See who donates the most to your member of Congress.] (https://www.usnews.com/congress)...

...They funnel money through 501c3 tax-exempt foundations, and they give money to other foundations, lobbying organizations, and right wing think tanks. They have PACs; they support candidates. Only a small portion of what they control do they divulge.
But it has now come out how involved they have been in funding Tea Party groups, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and Citizens for a Sound Economy ($12 million). [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on the Tea Party.] (https://www.usnews.com/opinion/photos/tea-party-cartoons)

... According to Mayer, $196 million dollars in total was distributed in the last 10 years to conservative causes and institutions.

... the Koch brothers hosted a conference in Palm Springs that resembled an armed camp....
...Reporters were confronted by private security guards and told to leave or they would be arrested, and a Common Cause (https://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4741359) official had his lunch reservation canceled and was told to check out of the hotel by Koch’s security detail. Young environmental activists were slapped with $100,000 law suits for demonstrating and engaging in pranks. A [I]Politico reporter describes (https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48624.html) being thrown out and threatened with “a night in the Riverside County jail.”
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Then there is even more:
<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> 501(c)(4) nonprofit
Employer Identification Number: 52-1349353
FreedomWorks is a conservative advocacy organization based in Washington, DC. Originally founded as Citizens for a Sound Economy in 1984, FreedomWorks adopted its current name after merging with Empower America in 2004. The group is currently chaired by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX).
According to its website, FreedomWorks recruits and mobilizes volunteer activists to fight for lower taxes, less government, and more freedom. As such, the organization is sometimes characterized as a right-wing version of MoveOn.org. However, FreedomWorks is run by corporate lobbyists, not grassroots activists. FreedomWorks has been a prominent opponent of the Obama administration, most notably by organizing Tea Party protests across the country in April, 2009.
*FORMERLY KNOWN AS CITZIENS FOR A SOUND ECONOMY*

<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> Source: https://mediamattersaction.org/transparency/organization/FreedomWorks/overview
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
You seem to leave out they biased right-wing political media “monsters” that are destroying the soul of America with ridiculous factoids. Some of which I think that you are repeating.

<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> Fact Checking The Sunday Shows - August 21, 2011 (https://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201108220002)

<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> CLAIM: Sen. McCain And Gov. McDonnell Suggested Recovery Act Spending Didn't Help Unemployment.

FACT: The Economy Shed Millions Of Jobs During The Bush Recession Until President Obama's Policies Began To Turn Things Around

FACT: Once It Took Effect, Recovery Act Spending Helped Turn The Job Market Around

Click here for more on Republicans misusing unofficial projections for unemployment to attack President Obama. (https://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201106080005)

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> CLAIM: Gov.McDonnell Absolved President Bush Of Responsibility For Deficits, Laying Full Blame On President Obama

CLAIM: Santorum Claimed Programs Like Medicaid And Food Stamps Are "The Core Problem With Our Deficit"

FACT: President Obama Inherited A Projected Deficit Of $1.2 Trillion

FACT: Bush-Era Republican Policies, Including Bush Tax Cuts And Two Wars, Are The Primary Drivers Of The Debt Over The Next Decade

<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> The Bush Tax Cuts Are The Primary Driver Of Federal Budget Deficits Over The Next Decade.

CBO Estimates That Shift From Projected Surpluses To Actual Deficits Over 2002-2011 Period Includes $2.02 Trillion In Debt From Bush Tax Cuts, Including 2010 Extension.
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
FACT: Past GOP Plans To Reform Medicaid And Food Stamps Would Have Hurt The Economy

CBPP: Converting SNAP And Medicaid To Block Grants "Would Not Only Increase Hardship And Destitution In Recessions, But Also Would Further Weaken A Slumping Economy And Lead To The Loss Of Many More Jobs." According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:
<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> CLAIM: Santorum Suggested High Corporate Taxes Hurt U.S. Competitiveness

FACT: Effective Corporate Tax Rates In The U.S. Are Lower Than Many Other Countries Including China, Canada, And Japan
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
This Week

CLAIM: Huntsman Suggested Companies Aren't Hiring Because Of Uncertainty And Confusion Caused By Regulation

FACT: Businesses Blame Weak Demand — Not Government Policies — For Weak Hiring

WSJ: "The Main Reason" For Hiring Reluctance Is "Scant Demand, Rather Than Uncertainty Over Government Policies." According to the Wall Street Journal:
The National Federation of Independent Businesses -- a small-business trade association that is considered the most right wing of the major business groups -- continually polls its members and releases the results. Here's what they say is their single most important problem:

Link to chart here: https://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/the-problem-tax-fears-and-bad-sales.png
As you can see, sales - that is to say, demand for their products - dominate the chart, while fear of taxes is lower than in the '90s. The concern over sales is understandable.

Not only is the economy bad. But as the next chart shows, it keeps under performing what the businesses assume will happen.
Link to chart here: https://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/sales-dipping-and-already-below-expectations.png
So, if anything, businesses have been too optimistic over the past few years. [Washington Post, 7/22/10 (https://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/why_businesses_arent_hiring_in.html)]

<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> CLAIM: Huntsman Suggested A Flat Tax Could Avoid Being Regressive By "Simply" Phasing Out The Deductions, Loopholes And "Biases In The System"

FACT: National Flat Tax Such As Proposed "Fair Tax" Would Unfairly Burden Lower And Middle Classes

Page source: https://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201108220002
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

They're just a lot of people who have been Taxed Enough Already.
Maybe so, as far as lower income bracket, middle income bracket, and small businesses are concerned.

But the millionaires, billionaires and the large corporations particularly the ones that outsource jobs out of this country to places that in essence enslave people and as a direct result unfairly compete with our production and wages which has the net effect of a higher unemployment rate in also diminishing revenues here (during a time of war I might add); not to mention the fact that slavery wherever it is in the world is wrong.

Anyway, I agree with what Warren Buffett said when he said: “We should Stop Coddling the Super-Rich (https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1)”,.

Also, I think taxing the “Super-Rich” more than we do now should not be confused (intermingled with) with low income and middle income wage earners, or small businesses when it comes to specific tax policy.

There has been too much McCarthyism (https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/McCarthyism) like red-baiting (https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/red-baiting) going on regarding specifically the tax issues by the Tea Party and their ilk.

As far as I'm concerned making comparisons between taxing the Super-Rich more, and everybody else is like mixing oil and water and expecting it to stay homogenized forever; it’s physically possible (to get oil and water to stay homogenized for a period of time without having some sort of a bonding agent), without (and possibly even with for all I know) the bonding agent it nevertheless takes an extreme amount of agitation and the result is temporary.

Saying that people who believe the “Super-Rich” should be taxed more are communists is; IMHO, absurd, and ridiculous and just plain wrong.

Here's an interesting look at the conflict between the taxpayers (TEA Party) and the tax-takers....

I watched that video.
It is obviously cherry-picked scenes and the agitator that was supposedly from the Teamsters Union could very well have been hired by somebody that supports the tea party to make the other side look bad.

That kind of agitation is a tactic that has been used by right-wing fascists in the United States to incite violence so as to shut up the other side when the other side is an obvious majority.
It's a form of traditional, right-wing, fascist character assassination tactic which is obvious to those of us that have been subjected to it in the past.

The article below reefers to the “Food Stamp” program and the complete article can be found @: https://news.yahoo.com/usa-becomes-food-stamp-nation-sustainable-160645036.html
<table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt" valign="top"> A LOW WAGE SUPPORT PROGRAM
Over the past 20 years, the characteristics of the program's recipients have changed.
In 1989, a higher percentage were on benefits than working, but as of 2009 a higher percentage had earned income.

"SNAP is increasingly work support," said Ed Bolen, an analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
And that's only likely to get worse: So far in the recovery, jobs growth has been concentrated in lower-wage occupations, with minimal growth in middle-income wages as many higher-paid blue collar jobs have disappeared.
And 6 percent of the 72.9 million Americans paid by the hour received wages at or below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour in 2010. That's up from 4.9 percent in 2009, and 3 percent in 2002, according to government data.

Bolen said just based on income, minimum wage single parents are almost always eligible for food stamps.
"This becomes an implicit subsidy for low-wage jobs and in terms of incentives for higher wage job creation that really is not a good thing," said Arindrajit Dube, an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, whose research shows raising the minimum wage would spur economic activity.
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
If the Tea Party had their way, I think that there would be no national minimum wage, which is already inadequate in the first place.

There would most definitely be hungrier, starving, homeless people (I'm referring to families with children with people that would otherwise be working; not “bums”, lazy”, or “welfare queens”), than there are now.

And when it comes to the “free-market” rhetoric that has been liberally mentioned by the conservatives, just remember that slavery was a major asset in the free market capital in our history.

Does that make it right?... ...Hell no!... ... Should slavery be continued in foreign countries for our benefit?... ... No... ... Should slavery be reinstated by essentially having absolutely no federal minimum wage or workplace safety standards whatsoever?... ... No.

Should we allow our environment to be degraded so badly that it makes people in certain neighborhoods ill and unable to work and cause certain neighborhoods to actually become unlivable and to unnecessarily force species of life into extinction so certain forms of so-called "Capitalism" (I'm referring to coddling the "Super -Rich" here) can continue its gluttony?... ... No.

Supposedly, the difference between so-called "Capitalism" and so-called "Socialism" is that capitalists (supposedly) steal from the poor and the Socialists (supposedly) steal from the rich.

The fact is, taxes are not intended to be theft. They are intended to be for things that are for the benefit all; rich and poor alike.
The rhetoric that has been flying around from the Tea Party group about taxes, makes it sound like taxes or some form of treason. That connotation is an absurdity!

I could go on, but I think that I have probably reached close to the limit of what's allowed in a single post.

Speak2Truth

08-23-2011, 02:19 PM

Hotspring, this is interesting stuff. Conservatives generally DO have to hold gatherings with tight security because Leftists intentionally engage in disruptive, damaging behavior. Heck, that's how Hitler got to power, how the Red Guard bullied society, how Greece was bullied into backing off saving its own economy (so the US Taxpayer is forced to bail out Greece, WTF??) That's how the Left tried to disrupt Democracy in Wisconsin, where The People elected representatives to save the State's economy so the Leftist politicians fled the State and had their thugs go disrupt the lawful conduct of the Legislature.

Even your quotes point out that Leftists were intentionally trying to disrupt the meeting, so it's only sensible that security guards defend the Right of those in attendance to conduct their meetings without outside attack.

... the Koch brothers hosted a conference in Palm Springs that resembled an armed camp....
...Reporters were confronted by private security guards and told to leave or they would be arrested, and a Common Cause official had his lunch reservation canceled and was told to check out of the hotel by Koch’s security detail. Young environmental activists were slapped with $100,000 law suits for demonstrating and engaging in pranks.
Such uncivilized scum have to be forcefully held at bay. They leave no other option.

I didn't see any numbers on "funding" the TEA Party. However, I've attended a few of their events in town here and they were nothing like the slick, professional operations funded by Soros. We've had TEA Party events in downtown Santa Rosa the past few years. I went. Did you? I mean, if we're going to talk about them we should know what the hell we are talking about. The lying scum on CNN sure as heck aren't giving us the Truth. I was horrified to see their little panel of talking heads yakking on about a "racist" group... obviously they were playing to the Leftist agenda rather than trying to report the Truth.

So, we have well-moneyed people on BOTH sides of the aisle funding their agendas. What are their agendas?

The Conservative side is fighting to restore economic liberty, the freedom to prosper and live the American Dream. They fight for Liberty from overbearing Government. They fight to free YOU from other people stealing your stuff. If you are one of the moochers screaming for Government to go steal more stuff from other people and give it to you to make things "fair", you have good reason to dislike them. Thieves always hate it when their prey fight back.

The Leftist side, funded by George Soros, is "fundamentally transforming" the USA into a Communist Dictatorship, in which Government controls the means of production and redistribution of wealth. Nationalizing GM then handing its ownership to the Union was a powerful statement! So was seizing the assets of honest businesses to keep the crooked leftist-run corporations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, out of bankruptcy court. That is Fascism/Socialism. That's the goal of the Soros folks. So is driving American businesses into bankruptcy so we can, as Obama crowed, become the "best customers" to foreign manufacturers and oil drillers. Their money and hard work is devoted to "de-developing" the United States, in the words of Obama's Science Czar.

They have an AGENDA and told us about it:

13763

It's pretty easy for me to choose sides. I respect individual Rights and Equality. I insist we should be free to prosper by our efforts and NOT have that stolen from us by Leftist thieves, eager to fill their own pockets with the product of our labor.

I'm an American. I will stand with anyone putting their own hard-earned cash into fighting to defend American principles against the thieves who are already "fundamentally transforming" our nation.

How about you?

Do you side with those trying to "de-develop" the United States or those trying to defend our Liberty?

You say slavery should not be implemented in other countries for our benefit. Hell no! is correct. However, WE are not enslaving anyone - their own Socialist/Communist governments are. And, increasingly, that enslavement is taking root in the US, as people who struggle to make ends meet have their gains stolen from them by the greedy hands of others who would rather mooch than labor.

If you truly believe in that "hell no" then I suggest you stand with the pro-Americans for a change and try to restore our nation's Constitutional principles.

For starters, let's get back to taxing foreign imports rather than American industry. Let's elect someone who will kick Brazil out of drilling off the Louisiana coast and ALLOW Americans to get back in there! We don't want to be the "best customer" to slave-nations, after all. We want AMERICANS to prosper.

Right?https://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/cielo/misc/pencil.png

Speak2Truth

08-23-2011, 02:37 PM

If the Tea Party had their way, I think that there would be no national minimum wage, which is already inadequate in the first place.

It's also the reason so many young Americans cannot find work and live a life of idleness, never learning a work ethic.

It's also the reason so many employers try to hire illegal invaders and pay them cash under the table. They can't compete if they pay the minimum wage.

A minimum-wage job should NOT be a goal for any primary bread-winner! Pulling weeds is a great way for a couple of teenagers to earn some pocket cash - it was for me - but if the "employer" is not free to pay what the job is actually worth then they remain unemployed. Working minimum wage at Taco Hell is a way to earn cash to educate oneself - or to bring supplemental income to the household. However, it's insane to believe the burger-flipping job should pay enough to buy the home, make the car payments, pay for the Cable TV, send the kids to College...

If the employer is not free to pay what the job is actually worth, the Employer cannot compete and we end up buying the products of their Chinese competitors because they've gone out of business. Or maybe they're lucky enough that Obama will nationalize their corporation and hand them a bunch of other people's cash to stay afloat... but under Fascism only a select few are favored. The rest pay the price for such favoritism.

Heck, I shoveled snow as a kid and told the customer to just pay me whatever the job is worth to them. Some were cheap, some paid excessively. I didn't have the cost overhead of a bunch of damned bureaucrats (those two words belong together) getting paid way too much to force my customer to pay me a minimum amount - I just FREELY worked out a deal that we could both agree on. I bought my first Super-8 movie camera and kept film in it by doing jobs like that. I went on to get an education by working hard, earning my way up, paying for my own college courses, improving my skills, making more money, taking more courses... It was HONEST. I didn't pick anyone else's pockets to get above the "minimum wage" skillset.

Don't worry- China has this figured out. They pay far less than our minimum wage to their slaves and ship their junk over here. We are becoming their "best customer" because we don't allow employers to pay what a job is actually worth - and because we pile tax after tax upon American employers instead of foreign imports. If you love Chinese products, just keep demanding American employers get taxed more and more and more.

That's why this ship arrives in the USA with fully loaded cargo containers then sails back to China with empty cargo containers...

13762

https://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/forum/topics/ship-from-china-the-emma

https://www.lansinglabornews.org/index.cfm?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&homeID=162329

Hotspring 44

08-28-2011, 01:01 AM

It's also the reason so many young Americans cannot find work and live a life of idleness, never learning a work ethic.

It's also the reason so many employers try to hire illegal invaders and pay them cash under the table. They can't compete if they pay the minimum wage.

A minimum-wage job should NOT be a goal for anyone! Pulling weeds is a great way for a couple of teenagers to earn some pocket cash - it was for me - but if the "employer" is not free to pay what the job is actually worth then they remain unemployed.
If you are saying that the federal minimum wage is a major contributing reason why so many people are unemployed today I don't know for sure, but, I believe that assessment in any event would be incorrect.

Part of a good work ethic is more than just working hard for next to nothing just for the sake of having a good work ethic, there is more to it than that.
Part of a good work ethic is being confident and aware that your honest labor is worth at least minimum-wage in the first place.
Otherwise, if you're not worth it to the employer, the employer has the “right” to fire you immediately!
Also being an independent contractor makes it possible to legally charge below or above minimum wage and even per job too.

Heck, I shoveled snow as a kid and told the customer to just pay me whatever the job is worth to them. Some were cheap, some paid excessively. I didn't have the cost overhead of a bunch of damned bureaucrats (those two words belong together) getting paid way too much to force my customer to pay me a minimum amount - I just FREELY worked out a deal that we could both agree on.
I think that's called being an independent contractor.

I bought my first Super-8 movie camera and kept film in it by doing jobs like that. I went on to get an education by working hard, earning my way up, paying for my own college courses, improving my skills, making more money, taking more courses... It was HONEST. I didn't pick anyone else's pockets to get above the "minimum wage" skillset.
Are you saying and or implying that anybody that receives any form of government assistance whatsoever to go to college and get an education so they can Have a career or at least a decent paying job is picking pockets?

Don't worry- China has this figured out. They pay far less than our minimum wage to their slaves and ship their junk over here. We are becoming their "best customer" because we don't allow employers to pay what a job is actually worth - and because we pile tax after tax upon American employers instead of foreign imports. If you love Chinese products, just keep demanding American employers get taxed more and more and more.
I think you should go back and read what you just wrote!...

“Don't worry- China has this figured out. They pay far less than our minimum wage to their slaves and ship their junk over here.”... You seem to be complaining about employers here being required (“forced”) to pay a minimum-wage to their employees; some of which you implied aren't worth it, or at least something approximating that statement...
...Then you go on to mention that we should do something in the way of paying people less then minimum wage for their labor here in America that would become competitive with “slave” wages in China! (?).
Good, God, man!... ... I. hope that I am wrong about that and that's not what you're saying but that's what it sounds to me like what you've been saying.

As far as Raising taxes on imports is concerned, with Tea Baggers in there, that will certainly never happen; no, Instead They would just lower And or eliminate taxes, which some of may well should be lower, but they won't raise any; just exactly what they want; one example: "
Grover Glenn Norquist"I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-37">[38]</sup> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist#Views_on_government). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist#Views_on_government)
BTW, China is by far not the only place where there is what you're referring to as “slave” (wage) “labor” situations, theoretically competing with our labor for products that we now import that we could otherwise have a manufacturing base here in the US.
Just as a couple of examples there are the Philippines, India, Africa, parts of Central America etc. just to name a few: otherwise known in general term as, “outsourcing” (https://wikis.nyu.edu/ek6/modernamerica/index.php/Industry/Outsourcing) .

But of course, if we were to pay a “living wage” (https://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/) here for the same things as manufacturing countries do that use what is essentially slave labor wages here in US; those things would cost us more.

BTW, I totally agree with and have always said that the “too big to fail” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail) banks situation was a bad situation we should have never been in, in the first place and that those banks should have been regulated properly to begin with so that wouldn't have happened in the first place. But no, the free-market cannibalism (https://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Market+cannibalism) in the banking and S&L's, more outsourcing, and unnecessary tax cuts for the “super rich” was (and still is) happening instead.

I am certainly not convinced that a Republican president or any conservative Congress would have been Capable of doing any better for the public as what Obama has under the same circumstances.

Of course, America seems to have based a lot of its vested interests in the war machine some of which is most likely contrary to some left-wing beliefs.
Although unfortunately, it's probably necessary to invest in defense considering the state that the world is in at this point in time.
I'm thinking that there are profiteers that are making a mockery of defense spending and have and are essentially fraudulently ripping off America in the sums of 100’s of $billions.

Then there is the “prison industrial complex (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_industrial_complex)” situation that could definitely get out of control if it is not already out of control. Where is the tea party in regards to that "big government" cabal?

"Criminologists and legal scholars in other industrialized nations say they are mystified and appalled by the number and length of American prison sentences.

The United States has, for instance, 2.3 million criminals behind bars, more than any other nation, according to data maintained by the International Center for Prison Studies at King's College London.

China, which is four times more populous than the United States, is a distant second, with 1.6 million people in prison. (That number excludes hundreds of thousands of people held in administrative detention, most of them in China's extrajudicial system of re-education through labor, which often singles out political activists who have not committed crimes.)"
Source page for above quotes: https://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?aid=8801&context=vaThere is too many profiteering interests’ hands in the pie for that to be a fair, just, equitable system.

Proliferating it anymore than it already has been would be (and already is) detrimental to society.
I'm thinking education not incarceration; generally speaking but I'm sure the Conservatives and Tea Party would have nothing of spending one cent to remedy that, no, I think they would be in the feeding frenzy of incarceration for profit instead.

There most definitely should be more good paying jobs and careers available so that fewer people will not fall into the traps that make it so they end up in prison for whatever otherwise avoidable reasons.

It seems to me using the logic that the tea party and other RW conservatives have expressed they would prefer to see people starve to death than to get any assistance from the federal government.

Another thing is that the tea party doesn't want "big government"... ...accept..."the religious agenda in which a reasonably large amount of the Tea Party's members are into the federal government becoming more religiously affiliated: The Tea Party’s generals may say their overriding concern is a smaller government, but not their rank and file, who are more concerned about putting God in government." (https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-tea-party.html?_r=1)