We're having a reenactment of the Boston tea party at our college on tax day to protest Obama's outrageous spending, and this song was in the invitations. Was it supposed to be funny? It's like really old school music. I don't know why but it made me laugh.
Although I agree with the words, this video made me laugh so hard
Sin, I normally like what you have to say, but that's total bullshit.
Obama swept into power on a wave of Populism, promising national healthcare, the subjugation of economic rights in the name of economic stimulus and the environment.
Having said all that, this song is a little cheesy. Though I'm glad these Tea Parties are happening, with the movement as it currently exists, I think you'll see a lot of the liberty-oriented third parties coming together, hopefully merging to present a united front against both the right and the left wing by the time the next federal election happens (although, with the power of the internet, you might even see these people come together to nominate Liberty-oriented candidates for the legislative elections in 2010.
Or maybe this is all a pipe dream, but a guy can hope. Where are Canadian brains supposed to drain to if America just becomes Canada South (except with a far shittier banking system)?
why is it that i feel as if im the only one who studied history properly, the only alternitive to spending to fix the economy is to do nothing and pretend it will fix itself. If Hoover had taken the first choice he could have avoided the depression. He took the second choice and the rest is history.
Kashif, you can't eat , you can't build a house out of paper, you can't go to space with paper.
When a government spends and prints, all it is doing is making the dollars that already exist less valuable, because the same amount of capital is being represented by a higher amount of paper.
Sure, spending on roads and bridges will bring some people from the brink of ruin to some temporary stability, but the problem is that Americans are buying more and more on credit, and saving less and less. And, uh, 'doing nothing' isn't exactly historically accurate. He signed laws not all that different from the actions of the Obama government in the last couple of months, in actual fact.
"That's pretty fallacious, McK. How many Libertarian Party Congressmen are there? Zero. How many Constitution Party Congressmen are there? Zero."Kashif isn't saying that printing more money would help, and thats not even what the Obama Adminstration is doing. What hes saying is that government spending of funds puts more money out into the market. Every single historian agrees that the government's spending during WWII is what ended the depression.And to stay on topic, holding Tea parties to protest the President's spending plan makes absolutely no sense. The purpose behind the original tea party was that colonists were not being represented at all in parliment and therefor had no say in the taxes put on the tea. And unless you live in Washington D.C. which there is no congressional representation, you have had an oppurtunity for your view to be represented in congress.
The U.S. government for over a century has been dominated by the left and the right. There hasn't been a Constitutional Adherent in any seat of power for a very very long time in the U.S.
And, yes, the U.S. is printing more money. They are buying commercial paper and are involved in quantitative easing. Those are fancy ways of printing money but it's still printing money
Americans (and their governments as well) spend far too much and save far too little. This is the crux of the matter, and you can tapdance around that all you want, but that is the major problem.
You wanna take from achievers somehow you think that's fair
and redistribute to those folks who wont get out of their easy chair
Eww, simplistic bullshit.
"Bellum said:"It's a song not an essay, dumbass"You wanna take from achievers somehow you think that's fairEww, simplistic bullshit. "
and redistribute to those folks who wont get out of their easy chair
It's also bullshit propaganda.
"The welfare state is a figment of Libertarians' imagination? Unprecedented bailouts and corporate welfare is 'bullshit'? No, I'm afraid that's actually happening, Bellum."
What's that got to do with anything? How does that apply to the concepts of "freedom" or "liberty"? More importantly, how does that relate to freedom as defined by the US constitution, just to avoid the bullshit? I'm not sure bailing out failing corporations was a good idea, but the message seems to be yet another thinly veiled attempt to vilify vaguely socialist policies, and to equate it to the American conservative perception of what socialism is (communism).
The above quote is important, because it highlights a big flaw in the popular conservative way of thinking, that people who have more money are superior because they are more productive and harder working. Of course, this is only true as long as it isn't obvious that the big corporations are raping you in the ass by taking government money and using it to pay executive bonuses, but I wont fault the people for a natural level of hypocrisy.
What's that got to do with anything? How does that apply to the concepts of "freedom" or "liberty"? More importantly, how does that relate to freedom as defined by the US constitution, just to avoid the bullshit? I'm not sure bailing out failing corporations was a good idea, but the message seems to be yet another thinly veiled attempt to vilify vaguely socialist policies, and to equate it to the American conservative perception of what socialism is (communism). The above quote is important, because it highlights a big flaw in the popular conservative way of thinking, that people who have more money are superior because they are more productive and harder working. Of course, this is only true as long as it isn't obvious that the big corporations are raping you in the ass by taking government money and using it to pay executive bonuses, but I wont fault the people for a natural level of hypocrisy. "I don't think the people behind the Tea Parties are necessarily conservatives. They aren't necessarily supporting the rich and opposing the poor. Especially when you consider their opposition to the way the government is handling the failing companies in the steel, manufcacturing, auto, and banking sectors, and to the way the government is precipitating inflation that is potentially devestating to the working poor.
Instead of letting these companies go to chapter 11, and opening up their capital to be bought at a discount by potentially more-productive users of it, the government is maintaining the roster of many of these companies (Wagoner's dismissal notwithstanding.)
And the existence of the Welfare State is dependent upon taxation, taxation is a fundamental violation of a person's liberty because it appropriates a portion of a person's wealth generating abilities to be given to less productive people. In other words, it is a declaration of sovereignty over the individual.
And the people behind the tea parties are opposed to the use of this wealth for anyone other than the creators of it. Whether or not it's given to people for bonuses they didn't deserve or used to invest in companies that should be allowed to fail isn't the issue for them, it's the fact that their wealth is being taken from them in the first place.
Are you suggesting that we should adapt pure capitalism? Even if such a thing is possible, its likely far more dangerous for the average person than a democratic government with a clear foundation (the constitution). Or are you suggesting that a government can exist without funding? Also, it's a little off to suggest that people who's wages are payed by the government aren't productive. We owe our modern society to a large number of these people. Also, without governments there is even less incentive to invest in basic research, which gets more expensive every year it seems. We rely on government for a great deal. Without taxation, governments cannot function.
"Bellum said:It's actually the Auburn University College Republicans, but the democrats and libertarians are encouraged to come too, and some of them are.What's that got to do with anything? How does that apply to the concepts of "freedom" or "liberty"? More importantly, how does that relate to freedom as defined by the US constitution, just to avoid the bullshit? I'm not sure bailing out failing corporations was a good idea, but the message seems to be yet another thinly veiled attempt to vilify vaguely socialist policies, and to equate it to the American conservative perception of what socialism is (communism). The above quote is important, because it highlights a big flaw in the popular conservative way of thinking, that people who have more money are superior because they are more productive and harder working. Of course, this is only true as long as it isn't obvious that the big corporations are raping you in the ass by taking government money and using it to pay executive bonuses, but I wont fault the people for a natural level of hypocrisy. "I don't think the people behind the Tea Parties are necessarily conservatives. They aren't necessarily supporting the rich and opposing the poor. Especially when you consider their opposition to the way the government is handling the failing companies in the steel, manufcacturing, auto, and banking sectors, and to the way the government is precipitating inflation that is potentially devestating to the working poor.Instead of letting these companies go to chapter 11, and opening up their capital to be bought at a discount by potentially more-productive users of it, the government is maintaining the roster of many of these companies (Wagoner's dismissal notwithstanding.)And the existence of the Welfare State is dependent upon taxation, taxation is a fundamental violation of a person's liberty because it appropriates a portion of a person's wealth generating abilities to be given to less productive people. In other words, it is a declaration of sovereignty over the individual.And the people behind the tea parties are opposed to the use of this wealth for anyone other than the creators of it. Whether or not it's given to people for bonuses they didn't deserve or used to invest in companies that should be allowed to fail isn't the issue for them, it's the fact that their wealth is being taken from them in the first place."
"Snipzor said:*gets camera ready*"Anyone realize that this tea party is bound to get violent? This kind of stuff never works well. Get a bunch of angry, young, impatient, and especially impulsive people together and mob rule will take over. As it always does."I can't wait for it, actually."
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment