I think that complaint has come more from the mainstream left and right, and the media. Which is a lot like they treated the Tea Party (which was barely more coherent than OWS).
Have you forgotten the event around which the TEA party formed? And that TEA almost instantly became an acronym for Taxed Enough Already? Nevermind. I know who I'm talking to. You could not have forgotten, because you refused to acknowledge it in the first place.
Critics have noted that the protesters often can't even define what they are protesting, or that their "issues" are such a diverse hodgepodge as to be unintelligible. Again, this is straight from Alinsky's playbook. The organizer, he wrote, "should search for and use the wrong reasons to achieve the right goals. He should be able, with skill and calculation, to use irrationality in his attempts to progress to a rational world. For a variety of reasons the organizer must develop multiple issues…. Multiple issues mean constant action and life."
Have you forgotten the event around which the TEA party formed? And that TEA almost instantly became an acronym for Taxed Enough Already?
It's not like pointing out the facts to Mark will change his mind,
Let's take a look at the first statement and juxtapose it with the second. The focus here will be on facts so when you respond, respond with them and not made up paranoid fantasies about government.
Fact #1: The original Tea Party originated from frustration over taxation without representation. All members of the current Tea Party are taxed with representation.
Fact #2: Taxed Enough Already, the adjusted meaning of the new Tea Party, is also devoid of facts. We are still under the Bush Era tax cuts. The US Tax burden is at its lowest level since 1958. Right now our overall tax burden (state, federal, local) is 23.6 percent. This is down from 27 percent in the 1970s-1990s. The statutory tax rates have largely remained unchanged since Clinton was president. So how exactly are they taxed enough already?
Regarding Alinksy, it was my understanding that he is required reading for many of the Tea Party factions for its framework on community organizing.
New employees receive a required-reading list that includes “Rules for Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky, the father of modern community organizing,
It's funny that you bring him up, though. Recall his prophetic words in his last interview with Playboy magazine (which I read only for the articles) in 1972.
The middle class actually feels more defeated and lost today on a wide range of issues than the poor do. And this creates a situation that's supercharged with both opportunity and danger. There's a second revolution seething beneath the surface of middle-class America -- the revolution of a bewildered, frightened and as-yet-inarticulate group of desperate people groping for alternatives -- for hope.
Their fears and their frustrations over their impotence can turn into political paranoia and demonize them, driving them to the right, making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday. The right would give them scapegoats for their misery -- blacks, hippies, Communists -- and if it wins, this country will become the first totalitarian state with a national anthem celebrating "the land of the free and the home of the brave."
Some guy on horseback, hmmm? Crazy how right he was...
More ironic is how you guys have attempting to demonize Alinksy in the exact way he described. Meanwhile, the true perpetrators of our problems are continuing to enjoy your servitude.
It's not like pointing out the facts to Mark will change his mind,
Too true. Have you checked out the thread of the last "big lie" cartoon? Mark has decided that he would rather believe a direct logical contradiction than to change his mind.
Mark, you ignorant slut. Only a complete economic ignoranus such as yourself (and yes, ignoranus is the correct spelling because you're being willfully ignorant and thus an asshole) cannot see that the out-of-control spending will either result in higher taxes on everybody, or the further debauching of the currency. Even your hero Warren Buffet acknowledges that fact -- the hated 1% can't cover the bills even if they're taxed at your mythical 90% (mythical because no one paid at anywhere close to that rate because of all the loopholes and tax shelters that existed. So YES, we are TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY.
Larry, anything other than ad hominem to offer? I don't see much in the way of facts. Flooding the world with spending and going into debt actually caused the value of the dollar to go up in the past so what you are saying isn't really accurate. There's not really any other way to say this but you're not being rational about government spending. Until you are, there's not much point in discussion.
Honestly, Mark? You do not comprehend the concept of insolvency? Or do you just think that it can't possibly happen here because America's so awesomely awesome that we're immune to historical/economic forces, and besides, it hasn't happened yet?
Well, we aren't Europe so that's not really a valid comparison. I understand what insolvency is quite well. I think what's happened here is that our debt is higher than its been in awhile and is a concern. As is typically the case with you folks, you have taken that concern, married it with your paranoia about government, and blown it so far out of proportion that much of what you say is irrational. Add in your theology about taxes and your ideas for solutions are, quite frankly, terrible.
14 comments:
I think that complaint has come more from the mainstream left and right, and the media. Which is a lot like they treated the Tea Party (which was barely more coherent than OWS).
I see how this works. If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie again.
Have you forgotten the event around which the TEA party formed? And that TEA almost instantly became an acronym for Taxed Enough Already? Nevermind. I know who I'm talking to. You could not have forgotten, because you refused to acknowledge it in the first place.
Gee, where would we ever get the idea that the OWS protesters lack a coherent message when that's what they are saying?
It's not like pointing out the facts to Mark will change his mind, he'll just keep f***ing that chicken, regardless.
Alinsky to Obama to Occupiers
Critics have noted that the protesters often can't even define what they are protesting, or that their "issues" are such a diverse hodgepodge as to be unintelligible. Again, this is straight from Alinsky's playbook. The organizer, he wrote, "should search for and use the wrong reasons to achieve the right goals. He should be able, with skill and calculation, to use irrationality in his attempts to progress to a rational world. For a variety of reasons the organizer must develop multiple issues…. Multiple issues mean constant action and life."
Have you forgotten the event around which the TEA party formed? And that TEA almost instantly became an acronym for Taxed Enough Already?
It's not like pointing out the facts to Mark will change his mind,
Let's take a look at the first statement and juxtapose it with the second. The focus here will be on facts so when you respond, respond with them and not made up paranoid fantasies about government.
Fact #1: The original Tea Party originated from frustration over taxation without representation. All members of the current Tea Party are taxed with representation.
Fact #2: Taxed Enough Already, the adjusted meaning of the new Tea Party, is also devoid of facts. We are still under the Bush Era tax cuts. The US Tax burden is at its lowest level since 1958. Right now our overall tax burden (state, federal, local) is 23.6 percent. This is down from 27 percent in the 1970s-1990s. The statutory tax rates have largely remained unchanged since Clinton was president. So how exactly are they taxed enough already?
Regarding Alinksy, it was my understanding that he is required reading for many of the Tea Party factions for its framework on community organizing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/26/us/politics/26freedom.html?_r=2&ref=politics
New employees receive a required-reading list that includes “Rules for Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky, the father of modern community organizing,
It's funny that you bring him up, though. Recall his prophetic words in his last interview with Playboy magazine (which I read only for the articles) in 1972.
The middle class actually feels more defeated and lost today on a wide range of issues than the poor do. And this creates a situation that's supercharged with both opportunity and danger. There's a second revolution seething beneath the surface of middle-class America -- the revolution of a bewildered, frightened and as-yet-inarticulate group of desperate people groping for alternatives -- for hope.
Their fears and their frustrations over their impotence can turn into political paranoia and demonize them, driving them to the right, making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday. The right would give them scapegoats for their misery -- blacks, hippies, Communists -- and if it wins, this country will become the first totalitarian state with a national anthem celebrating "the land of the free and the home of the brave."
Some guy on horseback, hmmm? Crazy how right he was...
More ironic is how you guys have attempting to demonize Alinksy in the exact way he described. Meanwhile, the true perpetrators of our problems are continuing to enjoy your servitude.
It's not like pointing out the facts to Mark will change his mind,
Too true. Have you checked out the thread of the last "big lie" cartoon? Mark has decided that he would rather believe a direct logical contradiction than to change his mind.
The congitive dissonance is strong with this one.
Mark, you ignorant slut. Only a complete economic ignoranus such as yourself (and yes, ignoranus is the correct spelling because you're being willfully ignorant and thus an asshole) cannot see that the out-of-control spending will either result in higher taxes on everybody, or the further debauching of the currency. Even your hero Warren Buffet acknowledges that fact -- the hated 1% can't cover the bills even if they're taxed at your mythical 90% (mythical because no one paid at anywhere close to that rate because of all the loopholes and tax shelters that existed. So YES, we are TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY.
Larry, anything other than ad hominem to offer? I don't see much in the way of facts. Flooding the world with spending and going into debt actually caused the value of the dollar to go up in the past so what you are saying isn't really accurate. There's not really any other way to say this but you're not being rational about government spending. Until you are, there's not much point in discussion.
Honestly, Mark? You do not comprehend the concept of insolvency? Or do you just think that it can't possibly happen here because America's so awesomely awesome that we're immune to historical/economic forces, and besides, it hasn't happened yet?
Let's see how the Euro does with sovereign defaults.
Well, we aren't Europe so that's not really a valid comparison. I understand what insolvency is quite well. I think what's happened here is that our debt is higher than its been in awhile and is a concern. As is typically the case with you folks, you have taken that concern, married it with your paranoia about government, and blown it so far out of proportion that much of what you say is irrational. Add in your theology about taxes and your ideas for solutions are, quite frankly, terrible.
Well, we aren't Europe so that's not really a valid comparison.
The first line!! He responded as Larry predicted with the first line!
it can't possibly happen here because America's so awesomely awesome that we're immune to historical/economic forces
I always thought American exceptionalism was a hobgoblin of the conservative mind. M proves otherwise.
Post a Comment