So you're advocating an ACTIVIST congress?

4/16/2010 1:07:13 PM

This is an excerpt from a 1995 memo from Dick Morris to Clinton just after the Oklahoma City bombing. Seems like he is still following the same playbook:

Quote :

"Later, under the heading “How to use extremism as issue against Republicans,” Morris told Clinton that “direct accusations” of extremism wouldn’t work because the Republicans were not, in fact, extremists. Rather, Morris recommended what he called the “ricochet theory.” Clinton would “stimulate national concern over extremism and terror,” and then, “when issue is at top of national agenda, suspicion naturally gravitates to Republicans.” As that happened, Morris recommended, Clinton would use his executive authority to impose “intrusive” measures against so-called extremist groups. Clinton would explain that such intrusive measures were necessary to prevent future violence, knowing that his actions would, Morris wrote, “provoke outrage by extremist groups who will write their local Republican congressmen.” Then, if members of Congress complained, that would “link right-wing of the party to extremist groups.” The net effect, Morris concluded, would be “self-inflicted linkage between [GOP] and extremists.”"

4/19/2010 2:23:40 PM

^Huh... kind of ironic that the "intrusive" surveillance measures ended up being enacted for real by a Republican... it's like things turned into the opposite of the Clinton plan, and the Teabaggers popped up anyway and got the "link Republicans with extremism" part done too.

Clinton wanted to fuck them, but instead they've fucked themselves, twice.

[Edited on April 19, 2010 at 2:33 PM. Reason : insert Clinton/fucking joke here]

4/19/2010 2:30:16 PM

^^Are you trying to make a point? Be more direct.

4/19/2010 2:44:29 PM

to OP:

Quote :

"Teabaggers are going to be the ruination of GOP"

more like

Quote :

".....ggers are going to be the ruination of the Democratic Party"

[Edited on April 19, 2010 at 3:45 PM. Reason : s]

4/19/2010 3:44:41 PM

playing hangman, are we?

4/19/2010 3:58:54 PM

Quote :

".....ggers"

4/19/2010 5:20:53 PM

Quote :

"4-19-2010: Gay rights protesters interrupted President Barack Obama's speech at a fundraiser for California Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) Monday night in Los Angeles. Activists from a group called GetEQUAL began shouting at Obama while he was speaking at the podium. They expressed frustration over the slow progress of repealing the ban on openly gay people serving in the military. The protests brought the speech to a halt, and the protesters did not lower their voices after others in the crowd urged them to end their shouting. "

Oh my..the FBI needs to watch this gay "extremist" group...they're unhappy with the president's policies. What if one of them does something violent? They're already yelling at the president and stopping his speech. It's a hate-group! Quick... Let's make up a disparaging name for GetEQUAL. How about "The Sweeteners"?

4/20/2010 9:08:35 PM

Wow, such biting sarcasm. WELL DONE!

you really zinged 'em!

4/20/2010 9:14:33 PM

The Illustrated Tea Party Dictionary
http://gawker.com/5506871/the-illustrated-tea-party-dictionary

[Edited on April 24, 2010 at 1:29 PM. Reason : Linky]

4/24/2010 1:28:00 PM

^ 10/10

4/24/2010 1:43:57 PM

"Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black”
http://ephphatha-poetry.blogspot.com/2010/04/imagine-if-tea-party-was-black-tim-wise.html

Quote :

" Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters —the black protesters — spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn’t like were enforced by the government? Would these protester — these black protesters with guns — be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment... "

4/26/2010 7:48:26 PM

well we can imagine a lot of things like, what if the tea party was black

do you think we would have had a year of negative MSLM coverage on their rallies or would the stories have been about the poor downtrodden in these tough economic times

4/26/2010 7:50:12 PM

lol negative coverage?

The tea baggers got overly positive coverage from the media all around.

4/26/2010 7:52:37 PM

Tea Party people are called racist because the vast majority wants to stop the massive non-European immigration that will turn America into a crumbling tower of Babel. Most Tea Partiers believe that we in America have the right to preserve our heritage, language, and culture, just as every nation has that human right. The vast majority of Tea Party activists oppose affirmative action and diversity, which are nothing more than programs of racist discrimination against white people. The vast majority of Tea Party enthusiasts despise Hollywood and the mass media.

You know, the unelected media bosses have far more power than any senator or congressman, and are far more alien to America than the British were at the time of the American Revolution. At least the British were of our own, Christian cultural heritage, while the non-Christian ethno-religious minority who dominates Hollywood sees itself as very distinct from the 98 percent of the rest of us.

Tea Party activists are true populists who see the powers that control international finance and the Federal Reserve as the biggest threats to American prosperity and freedom.

...... The Tea Party movement is made up of American people who have watched in silent anger while the nation of our forefathers has been destroyed. The Tea Party movement, as the original Tea Party, is about preserving our heritage and our freedom.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDeNBsD8iRc&


[Edited on April 26, 2010 at 9:12 PM. Reason : - David Duke ]

4/26/2010 9:11:33 PM

I respect the general concept and grassroots activism of the tea party movement

BUT

from my observations and from trailing the money the tea party at its root is nothing but a facade of the GOP and other Conservative think tanks trying to stir the pot with people who may have distanced themselves from being card toting Republicans.

I wonder how quick the "tea-party" will fizzle when a revenue-cut and spend republican takes office instead of a tax and spend democrat president.

Quote :

"The Tea Party movement is made up of American people who have watched in silent anger while the nation of our forefathers has been destroyed. The Tea Party movement, as the original Tea Party, is about preserving our heritage and our freedom. "

I do not agree with much that Pelosi and friends have been doing. Where though were tea-partiers 8 years ago when George Dubya began his raping of the constitution and the legacy of our forefathers. Obama has been significantly more irresponsible fiscally then an already spend happy Bush. There is no way though that I think Obama has guilty of more constitutionally questionable actions than Bush though. The only difference I therefore can rationalize for the sudden up-rising of the tea-parties is...

a. Obama is a donkey not an elephant.
b. Their are people still a little ticked off about Obama's skin color from the election begging for an excuse to protest.
c. The lingering recession has resulted in an uptick in bored angry ignorant folks who can easily be riled up by tea party leaders GOP pundits to jump on the tea party bandwagon.



If the tea-party really wants to cast its self as a "grass-roots" movement against gov't abuse then they should disalign themselves from GOP pundits and leaders like...

Sarah Palin
Rick Perry
Newt Gingrich
Dick Armey
etc

Even with their conservative basings they should not want the "old-guard" of the GOP to be the replacement for the liberal "socialist" president and congress currently in power.


Realistically the "Tea Party" could probably be more accuratly described as an Astroturf movement not a GrassRoots movement.

Ron Paul's campaign in 2008 was "Grassroots" the "tea-party" formed as a knee-jerk reaction to a liberal congress and a black president is NOT.

[Edited on April 27, 2010 at 10:45 AM. Reason : a]

4/27/2010 10:28:08 AM

^word

4/27/2010 12:30:02 PM

From Wikipedia...

Quote :

"Astroturfing denotes political, advertising, or public relations campaigns that are formally planned by an organization, but are disguised as spontaneous, popular "grassroots" behavior. The term refers to AstroTurf, a brand of synthetic carpeting designed to look like natural grass. The goal of such campaigns is to disguise the efforts of a political or commercial entity as an independent public reaction to some political entity—a politician, political group, product, service or event. Astroturfers attempt to orchestrate the actions of apparently diverse and geographically distributed individuals, by both overt ("outreach", "awareness", etc.) and covert (disinformation) means. Astroturfing may be undertaken by an individual promoting a personal agendum, or highly organized professional groups with money from large corporations, unions, non-profits, or activist organizations. Very often, the efforts are conducted by political consultants who also specialize in opposition research. Beneficiaries are not "grass root" campaigners but distant organizations that orchestrate such campaigns. "

4/27/2010 6:18:10 PM

any grassroots movement is always going to end up being funded by a main group, if it's going to stick around.

Ron Paul had ridiculous grass roots support, or so it seemed, but could barely get any of the vote when it mattered.

So i'd argue that no successful grassroots movements ever truly stays "grass roots."

In any case, your description of the Tea Baggers is accurate. Polls show that taxes aren't their main issues, despite their name and choice of signs during protests, the nebulous idea of "big government" is what they are really "about." But this is perfect for the powers that be that fund them, because it allows their guys to just throw around the term "big government" with no meaning, and make it seem like they are of the people.

It's almost brilliant, but there's only so much you can do without having any real organization. Without a clear leader, who do they have to distance themselves from people like David Duke who support the "tea partyers"?

4/27/2010 6:23:07 PM

Quote :

"Activists for Latino and immigrant rights -- and supporters of sane governance -- held weekend rallies denouncing the new law and vowing to do everything they can to overturn it. But where was the Tea Party crowd? Isn't the whole premise of the Tea Party movement that overreaching government poses a grave threat to individual freedom? It seems to me that a law allowing individuals to be detained and interrogated on a whim -- and requiring legal residents to carry identification documents, as in a police state -- would send the Tea Partyers into apoplexy. Or is there some kind of exception if the people whose freedoms are being taken away happen to have brown skin and might speak Spanish?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/26/AR2010042602595.html?wpisrc=nl_pmheadline

4/27/2010 7:12:50 PM