The Smearing of the Tea Party

[88Mariner]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

Governments exist to protect men from criminals, many people in government are criminals who exploit the court system that they maintain. And when was the last time the US suffered an invasion.

Food isn't a right but killing people in foreign country's to steal resources is. And how can you take pride in your country if you don't give a fuck about the people in it?

Listen, I agree with you. I am anti-war. I am against offensive wars (as opposed to defensive). Indeed, our elected officials have, and still, step beyond the scope of what government should do. But what our government is doing does not mitigate the fact that yes, they are stepping beyond their bounds, and yes, they are acting beyond the scope of what governments exist for. Nor does this mitigate the fact that providing taxpayer-funded healthcare is ALSO outside the scope of what governments should be doing.

Food isn't a right? Prove it. Without food, people die. And as Dig says below, "A society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable"


I'm curious, why do you say Food is not a right? Don't you care for your fellow countrymen? What is it, I wonder, that distinguishes an absolute necessity (as not a right) from something conditional (healthcare) that you think IS a right?


Also, i love my country. But I am highly skeptical of my government. Our country pulls together in adversity. There's no question about that. Hell, we pull together even when the adversity faces other countries. Are you saying I can't have pride unless I give a damn about everyone who is here legally?

[88Mariner]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

That theory doesn't work for us. Our Health care system isn't all that old. Plus we realise we are actually better off financially on every level. We actually got it twice. The Whitlam government gave it to us and then the Liberal party, by liberal they don't actually mean liberal , took it away. We had to get another Labor Government before we got it back, and it has been damaged quite a bit by the last Liberal Government. But the population were always on side .

Even with it's faults it's great !! If you go into any public hospital you are treated exactly the same regardless of your insurance status. We do have a thriving private health industry as well . Although they are actually subsidised out of our taxes!! So it not strictly speaking socialised medicine. Our public hospitals are where all the major stuff happens . Even if you have private health insurance if you have a serious problem you will end up in one of our big public hospitals simply because that is what they do best. We go in cycles, Liberals [Conservatives] tear it down. Labor builds it up again. But no government would dare to remove our Medicare now.

One way or the other it is so far in front of America's health system it's like another world. It costs far less to everyone , we have world class public hospitals, we have private and public working together. Best of all if something happens to us we know we will be looked after and not have to mortgage our home. As I said, not perfect, and most of the not perfect was keeping private industry happy, But so glad we have it. So yes, proud !!

You are absolutely right about the greed !!

Didi. Have you ever considered that the huge difference in eating habits and lifestyles between Australia and the US?

you said above:

Re health care. A healthy population is good economically . Our health care dollar goes an awful lot further than America's. This subject deserves it's own thread. Some really good points have been made by various posters.

Didi, do you realize that health care is only PREVENTATIVE? You don't go into a hospital when you're healthy. You go there when you are sick. A healthy population doesn't get healthy with 'free' healthcare. It only gets attended to after problems arise. The whole 'free healthcare' tribe has conveniently ignored the very health problems my country is facing and has faced for two decades now (if not longer).

I submit that a country will NEVER have a health population so long as the root causes of its ills subsist



btw,

http://www.wmctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13833438

these idiots should NOT be receiving free healthcare.

[trick12]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

If any country is attacked it has the right to retaliate, but why where they attacked in the first place. If both country's have the same military might they will very rarely attack each other. Attacks usually happen when the odds are stacked in favor of one country.

my point was an army attack to a country would lead to an attack back and will affect the public more than a sick person would. im all for recognizing the poor in a country, everyone should be able to get treatment if they have an emergency or need to see a doctor, it may be in a public hospital where its not as equipped and well managed as a private one, but they need to have something thats free. having equal healthcare for everyone tho i would see as an extra privilege given to the public, its good and def a plus but its not as public as the army.

[chunky]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

transportation isn't a right. food isn't a right. you have no right to property unless you purchase it. and so on...

Food isn't a right? Prove it. Without food, people die. And as Dig says below, "A society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable

I'm curious, why do you say Food is not a right? Don't you care for your fellow countrymen?

I didn't say food is not a right. I was being sarcastic following your first post.

No I don't really care for people based on geographical nonsense. I remember as a child being told to support England during the World Cup. When I asked why I was told "because its your country" This is not good enough for me. I take no pride in the accomplishments of various UK citizens, like wining the Ashes the World Cup the Second World War etc because I did nothing to contribute to any of these and the people who did didn't achieve them because of some inbreed character traits that they don't have. If I have any respect or admiration for anyone it's based on how they conduct themselves not on where they live.

[chunky]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

my point was an army attack to a country would lead to an attack back and will affect the public more than a sick person would.

Really

Iraq No retaliation in the US or UK
Afghanistan No retaliation in the US or UK
Vietnam No retaliation in the US
Korea No retaliation in the US
Bosnia No retaliation in the US or UK

We are more than happy to give money to kill people in foreign country's but we do not want to give money to look after people in our own country's

[88Mariner]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

Really

Iraq No retaliation in the US or UK
Afghanistan No retaliation in the US or UK
Vietnam No retaliation in the US
Korea No retaliation in the US
Bosnia No retaliation in the US or UK

We are more than happy to give money to kill people in foreign country's but we do not want to give money to look after people in our own country's

It's better that we don't have to fight on our soil. Hell, we let them have home field advantage! can be mad about that!

[Highsteppa]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

You have a point. but 'controlling their media image' is such a horseshit request. Only the media controls their image. this is why the MSM keyed them as the scapegoats for the shooting before the bodies had been put in the ambulance.

The Tea Party saying that they're victim of a media character assassination is more pathetic than that 8 minute video that Palin put on her facebook page crying foul before anyone from the shootings in Tuscon were buried. Any political movement can take control of their media image - part of the solution is getting control over their own supporters and putting a muzzle on the more extreme members which can make them look bad. Any group that says that they're at the mercy of the media's whim are undisciplined, uneducated or just plain unwilling to take control of the image they're putting forward. Any political movement worth it's salt would get a decent media consultant to make sure that they're putting their best foot forward each time they're making it into the news.

It's like saying that you didn't get a job you interviewed for because the interviewer was prejudiced against you before you even got in the door, not the fact that you didn't interview well. I'm sure runningman keeps this excuse handy whenever things don't work out for him.

[Highsteppa]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

thank you for proving my point florida. I don't really feel that way I just wanted a third party to point out that generalizations are ridiculous! Tea partiers aren't bad people just like most repubs and dems aren't.

Jedi trick worked.


Oh ya and Toasty what did you think was going to happen with drugged up people not working and guns and ammo at their disposal?

when did "Jedi Mind Trick" involve backpedaling frantically on shit you just invented?

[88Mariner]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

The Tea Party saying that they're victim of a media character assassination is more pathetic than that 8 minute video that Palin put on her facebook page crying foul before anyone from the shootings in Tuscon were buried. Any political movement can take control of their media image - part of the solution is getting control over their own supporters and putting a muzzle on the more extreme members which can make them look bad. Any group that says that they're at the mercy of the media's whim are undisciplined, uneducated or just plain unwilling to take control of the image they're putting forward. Any political movement worth it's salt would get a decent media consultant to make sure that they're putting their best foot forward each time they're making it into the news.

It's like saying that you didn't get a job you interviewed for because the interviewer was prejudiced against you before you even got in the door, not the fact that you didn't interview well. I'm sure runningman keeps this excuse handy whenever things don't work out for him.

[Highsteppa]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

ghhhhuuuuuuurrrrrrrrr

(right back at ya!)

[Highsteppa]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

Let me preface this by reaffirming that Jared Lee Loughner is a Grade A, first class, USDA Prime nutball. I have no idea if he was a teapartier, a republican, a democrat, a communist, whatever, and I don't think it really matters. The suggestion that he tried to assassinate Giffords because Sarah Palin put a gun sight on her district is ridiculous.

Equally ridiculous, however, is the suggestion that none of the violent language and imagery used by the talking heads on the right contributes to an environment where this sort of thing can happen. It takes absolutely zero effort to find numerous recent examples of right wingers invoking violence in political rhetoric, whether it's references to armed revolution, taking people "out," or "Second Amendment remedies." The list goes on and on, and even if there are examples of this same sort of rhetoric coming out of the loonies on the left, they are certainly far fewer than what we see on the right. That should be beyond serious dispute.

The world is a big and varied place, and when you pump this sort of vitriol into the popular consciousness, it goes to everyone, not just the people that understand that you're speaking metaphorically and can practice self-control. Back at the time of the gun-sight-map thing, Giffords herself noted: "For example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list, but the way she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gunsight over our district. And when people do that, they’ve gotta realize that there’s consequences to that action."

Would this have happened were it not for Palin putting a gunsight on Gifford's district? Probably. Would it have happened in the absence of all of this imagery and verbiage being used over the past couple of years? Who knows, but I think it's tough to say that none of it matters, that it has no impact upon society as a whole. There were a number of police officers that were shot by right wingers shortly after Obama got elected, and their stated reason for shooting them was that they were concerned that the government was coming to take their guns. Does that sort of thing happen in the absence of the BS coming from the far right suggestion that Obama is going to take away your guns? Uh, I doubt it.

I guess the point of it all is that while I'm not blaming those on the far right for this incident, I don't think they can wash their hands of the fact that they've contributed to creating an environment where the possibility that some whackjob is going to lose it and take it out on someone in a position of authority is higher, either. There are consequences to these words that people throw out there...

The thing about this situation that strikes me as funny is that the right wing are being looked at with the same scrutiny they (and other politicians on both sides of the isle) have famously held towards pop culture society in the name of family values. I don't see the scrutiny being placed on them being any different than the bullshit that they've pulled when it comes to rap music, heavy metal, violent films or video games whenever a similar situation has occurred. The kids who did Columbine? Must have been caused by them playing Doom on their computers at home. A kid shoots a cop? Must have been caused by his listening to Tupac or playing Grand Theft Auto. Both the right and the left have done this for years, and it's always been a cop out every time - partly because the issue is a lot more complicated than anything that can be explained in a news cycle soundbyte.

Now the right are in a situation where they're being called on months of toxic political behavior and commentary (maybe rightfully so, maybe not) and people are wondering if this contributed to this tragedy. It doesn't help that they've got pundits and members on their side that are more concerned with their political survival at any costs because they're being backed into a very tight corner right now - political commentators that are on the extreme can't backtrack, otherwise they'll be looked upon as weak, insincere or even possibly a traitor by their own supporters. I've never been convinced that those that pander to the more extreme wing of either side of the political spectrum really believe what they say, because their punditry is what puts food on the table for them, and any backing down now could be a disaster for their future. But anyone ensuring their own political future before their actual function of being a publicly elected servant of the people comes at the cost of them being looked at as possible sources of situations like the one that occurred in Tucson.

[DIDI]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

Didi. Have you ever considered that the huge difference in eating habits and lifestyles between Australia and the US?

you said above:




Didi, do you realize that health care is only PREVENTATIVE? You don't go into a hospital when you're healthy. You go there when you are sick. A healthy population doesn't get healthy with 'free' healthcare. It only gets attended to after problems arise. The whole 'free healthcare' tribe has conveniently ignored the very health problems my country is facing and has faced for two decades now (if not longer).

I submit that a country will NEVER have a health population so long as the root causes of its ills subsist



btw,

http://www.wmctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13833438

these idiots should NOT be receiving free healthcare.

I agree with most of what you say here, but unfortunately our diet is fast becoming yours. In fact I believe we have overtaken you in the obesity scales , we are at least running a close second. But we have healthier fat people. Some because of the preventive programs funded by our healthcare system and some because the problems that obesity causes diabetes etc are actually treated well and controlled . Everyone has access to good healthcare. Not ignoring at all, and always saying there can be massive improvements. I think our population is healthier rather than healthy , mainly because of the issues you bring up. But healthier is still better economically. Amount spent here per capita is considerably lower than the US and we have much better outcomes.

That link opens up a whole new set of problems , but even that has positive aspects in that they are trying to deal with it. And I hate to point this out but if you take away health care from the mother you are also taking it away from the babies. Maybe just neuter all the men, a bit like cats, you prevent more kittens if you neuter the toms That is a joke by the way. But I have to say I wouldn't be opposed to compulsory contraception in some cases.



I'm still proud.

[chunky]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

It's better that we don't have to fight on our soil. Hell, we let them have home field advantage! can be mad about that!

Its better you don't fight at all. If the Bush administration really thought that Iraq had WMD's they would not of invaded them at all. They picked a fight they knew they couldn't lose. If the odds where 50/50 they wouldn't have even considered it, unless there was a real threat to main land America.

[runningman]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

Highsteppa always the man trying to get in on the conversation.

[floridaorange]

Re: The Smearing of the Tea Party

Highsteppa always the man trying to get in on the conversation.

^Is that not what a public internet forum is by definition?