Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

tea parties spreading


Yes, folks, and the White House is getting a little concerned.

I've mentioned what's happening to three liberal friends and they pretty much dismissed the whole thing as a few kooks here and there acting stupid because that's what they hear from the liberal press if they hear anything at all.

Well, Obama and the media are getting concerned about a populist backlash, one that is not funded by professional organizations like the ones that helped get Obama elected and drive the liberal agenda, but by family, neighbors, friends and strangers across the nation.

There are about 1,500 "Tea Parties" now being organized.

Steeping in Cincinnati


Signs of the Times


More coverage here:


Where is the national coverage? There were 1,500 in a St. Louis rally, 2,000 in Greenville, an estimated 15,000 in Fullerton, 5,000 in Cincinnati, and momentum is building for nationwide rallies on April 15.

And hardly a whisper about it on the news and in print, except to minimize it.

This is America. This is "We the People". This is what happens when a centralized, overbearing government that wants to "control" us oversteps its bounds. This is the power of everyday, hard-working citizens.

The left is very very worried. I wonder what the President's teleprompter will tell him to say today?


Remember last year when the McCain camp was raked over the coals for suggesting the fundamentals of the economy were sound, how the media ran with that statement for weeks?

Well, now the White House has done an about face and is saying the same thing:


So, after scaring the people into submission and into going along with his leftist agenda (or trying to), the teleprompter is now telling the President to say that the "fundamentals" of the economy are "sound".

Incidentally, with regard to the current AIG bonus flap, who WROTE and pushed the AIG bailout? Who benefitted and contributed to what Party and what politicians. It starts with a "D".

It's funny how the media were unconcerned about thousands of earmarks costing tens of billions of dollars, maybe more, but are now railing against bonuses that are being paid according to legal contracts.

"Rewarding failure"? Maybe so, but isn't that what Obama wants to do in spending TRILLIONS of dollars we don't even have?

If this were a movie script, no one would believe it.


( 9 comments — Leave a comment )
Mar. 17th, 2009 12:41 am (UTC)
I am so not impressed.

See - oddly enough, I think that these people have valid concerns. I share a good number of them. Sad that few of them will ever get addressed as the power brokers will never allow it. I am not talking about your mysterious liberal demons here - rather I am talking about the ones who benefit most from these sorts of dealings - the bank and financial trading execs of Wall St, of corporate America, and yes Republican and Democratic power brokers.

Ed - compare the numbers of protesters here (many of whom are most likely taking advantage of an opportunity to have a gathering - few of whom would seriously believe this makes a scrap of difference) - yes compare this to the level of activity that BHO got in his campaign, to the number and volumes of the anti Junior protesters and the FREQUENCY of those. Yes I think thye have valid arguments - and yes they should be heard, and yes I agree with many of their issues; but I am not impressed by this. Show me gatherings of 10s of thousands - of filled convention centers, or the sorts of mobs we have already seen.

Hell, if U2 rolled down the street in an open top bus they could get this many followers without even singing a note!

And where is Ben Bernake's name in this. Who bailed them out the first time? Who wrote the initial plan and then didn't lay out ground rules and let them piss the money away with - once again - little oversight? There is WAY more blame to go around then you would like to admit.
Mar. 17th, 2009 12:52 am (UTC)
I'm sure had you witnessed the original Boston Tea Party you'd have whined it was a big waste of good tea.

Who wrote the bailouts? How about TIM GEITHNER for one, Mike one of the appointees you're so enamored with? He's the Tax Cheat that HAD to be confirmed because he was the ONLY ONE who knew the bailouts, etc. inside-out.

The Democtrats have had control for over two yeras now and, if you try to remember, RAMMED the bailouts and stimulus BILLS through with no debate and no oversight and with great Republican resistance ... and an additional $120 billion in pork attached to the SECOND ($750 billion) stimulus in 2008.

I was one of the few that pointed things like that out in opposing them from the BEGINNING. For Nancy, Barney, and, yes OBAMA, who pushed for them, to express outrage is laughable - except the media will not confront them with facts.

I have a good memory, Mike.
Mar. 17th, 2009 01:14 am (UTC)
I might have - I like tea. Of course it might also have depended on which side of the issue I was on. I see these as publicity stunts more than any meaningful demonstrations. I still find a lot to agree with - You must not have read that mail I sent you.

Sep 2008 Bernake and Paulson together pushed this crap through. These bail outs started before the current admin and its team was in place - much less decided. And yes I find it all a bit absurd, but what would have been the fall out? So is it somehow BHO fault that AIG took advantage of the first wad o cash they got and made some folk more wealthy then they were?

PAULSON - PAULSON - PAULSON and BERNEKE pretty much jammed all this down Congress' throat and no one in Congress has the stones to stand up to it. Who appointed those two? No one in Congress had much of an idea what was going on - a side effect of an election process that cannot make all the officials experts in all fields - much less the experience or expertise to challenge the will of these two.

I also have a good memory - but mine is in the left side of my brain.
Mar. 17th, 2009 01:25 am (UTC)
The Tea Party movement is gaining momentum without the help of media. The left can't stand that.

Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Reid, OBAMA, and Schumer JUMPED on it because it enabled them to buy an election by making the Republicans (who HAD the stones to stand up to the pushers) by making voters think McCain and the Republicans were the cause for the economic woes with the help of their allies in the media.

TIM GEITHNER, Mike. How effortlessly you glide over the facts when they don't suit your template. You criticised the lack of oversight, etc. and it was the DEMS generally and GEITHNER in particular who were responsible for writing these "bailout" debacles.

The Dems knew EXACTLY what was going on. So did critics like me who warned what would happen. That's why they HAD to pass it in 96 hours and WANTED to pass it sight unseen in 24 hours.

They're your guys, Michael. Feeling some buyer's remorse? *LOL*

I thought not.
Mar. 17th, 2009 01:50 am (UTC)
I heard about a couple in the news. Internet buzz will do it.

Sadly I am afraid that these people need to remember ... where were they when these companies were screwing the lot of us... oh right... making money from these same companies that they now don;t want to bail out.

Once again - no words in my mouth - You keep doing that... they are not now nor have they ever been my guys (and gals). So many times I say I dislike the parties... and I still believe it was the better of two evils. No remorse here. I got the one thing I wanted. No Junior - no junior clone - and I have never came around even 75% in agreement on any sitting POTUS since I can recall - Big Whoop.

I sooooo disagree with where you put(so much of ) your blame. If I read any credible info to support your claims I would still point to the OVERWHELMING evidence and volumes of other information that spreads a more rational and reasonable - and balanced view of the guilty. I have never said your picture was completely wrong - and if I did I also admitted so many times that there is SOME truth in it - I just said it was your perspective and did not include any of the HUGE amounts of evidence and claims that point to the ones you have almost irrationally defended. To ignore the wrong doings of these crooks on Wall Street, the sleeping regulators and the likes is to open the door to this happening again - only under even MORE obscure conditions.

Deal with crooks as crooks.

I ALSO SAID MANY TIMES I EXPECTED to find things to dislike in BHO ( and I have had things I disliked in him all along) - and to date I have still not come even CLOSE to the things I disliked about the Shrub, and I still think Mc was a BAD BAD McBad choice... and the McMoosehunteress was a train wreck waiting to happen.

I thik it was Mc who even admitted that the economy was not one of his stronger areas... cough cough. We will not get to see how disastrous he would have been. So far almost all this rancor is simply partisanship.

Please don't confuse me with your more extreme left friends. I am comfortable with my lean to the left as it is.

No buyers remorse here... yet.
Mar. 17th, 2009 02:02 am (UTC)
You defend these scoundrels and discredit everything I say about them so, if they're not your guys, I don't know what else I could call them. Heck, you voted for them or endorsed them.

At least McCain admitted he was not strong on financial matters. Obama pretended he was but knew less.

Obama is now repeating the McCain point that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong" so what does that say?

A hundred tons of crap is still crap and and not worth a thimble-full of truth. There is STILL no outrage over Obama pals Gorelick, Johnson, and Rains making tens of millions in bonuses for running Fannie and Freddie into the ground and misleading hundreds of thousands of stockholders and investors.

It's on the record, as are Maxine Waters (who we just found out has investments in one of the banks she helped get bailouts), Fran, et al who said point blank "THERE IS NO CRISIS", that those toxic loans were fine and dandy, and that the REGULATORS who were warning of meltdowns were the ones who needed to be investigated.

It's on the record, Mike ... funny the media won't play those clips.

Edited at 2009-03-17 02:04 am (UTC)
Mar. 17th, 2009 02:15 am (UTC)
"You defend these scoundrels and discredit everything I say about them"

Not exactly. I jump on fairness issues. I know you will hate that term. I have commented that I have some agreement with you, but who wants to read a bunch of people saying "Yes oh yes right on" all the time on LJ.

I do think you come at things a little farther over the top then the reality merits, and out of fairness I think that things are WAY more even than you credit them. The truth is that the population (more then half this time) voted more against Junior than they voted for BHO... and the Republican Party and their presented guy got the backlash from what the US voters feel was a failed and embarrassing administration that wasn't representing their values. I am glad to see him go like no one other than Nixon.

Honestly - it's not my intention to annoy. I look at all this as exercise. Keeps me sharp. To be honest, Ed, I don't get much challenge from the right wingers around here. I haven't found many here that could hold their own. They get offended too easily and just storm off, typically.
Mar. 17th, 2009 02:33 am (UTC)
Oh, I never get annoyed. *lol*

Plus, I know that everything I say can be backed up and, the years have shown, although I go out on limbs others dare not sit on until they have put their wet fingers to the winds or find out what 'the experts" say, I am correct the overwhelming majority of the time.

I do not make such observations unless I am pretty well versed on the subject but my instincts are usually just as good as my knowledge.

That others don't acknowledge that does not bother me. I've been used to it from an early age. It's also one of the reasons I've been so sensitive to what constitutes "human nature".
Mar. 19th, 2009 02:13 am (UTC)
( 9 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2014


Powered by LiveJournal.com