Third Party & Independents Archives

Tantrums From The Left

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa’s attempt to question Lois Lerner about IRS treatment of “tea party” and “patriot” groups during her tenure as IRS Director produced nothing new. Lois Lerner refused to incriminate herself of the crimes she may have committed by invoking her fifth amendment right. Upon learning he would again get no information from the witness, Darrell Issa adjourned the IRS Targeting meeting.

Pleading the Fifth

If you are ever charged with a crime and your case goes to trial, it is important to know that you do not have to testify. In fact, if your testimony would incriminate you in any way, it may be in your best interest to invoke your Fifth Amendment right. Keep in mind, however, that pleading the fifth applies to your entire testimony--this means that you cannot choose to answer some questions and refuse to answer others.

Lois Lerner pleads the fifth again, doesn't testify on IRS targeting

Issa announced on "Fox News Sunday" that Lerner would testify before his committee, only to have Taylor tell tell Politico a few minutes later that Lerner planned to continue to assert her Fifth Amendment rights and would not testify.

Elijah Cummings, U.S. Representative for Maryland's 7th congressional district, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and member of the Democratic Party, took exception to Darrell Issa's action. Rep. Cummings, having been denied his opportunity to slander Darrell Issa and misrepresent Rep. Issa's conduct, launched into a tirade.

Rep. Elijah Cummings Gets Cut Off at House IRS Hearing

"I don't care. The fact is I am asking a question," Cummings responded. "I am the ranking member of this committee and I want to ask a question! What are we hiding? What's the big deal? May I ask my question? May I make my statement?"

Elijah Cummings must not understand what the fifth amendment entails. There were no answers to questions available. There was no need for Rep. Cummings to ask questions because he would get no answers. His claim he wanted to ask a procedural question is disingenuous at best, because no procedural question was asked. After the meeting was adjourned Rep. Cummings launched into another assault on Darrell Issa's handling of the investigation.

"This investigation has been a political collusion directed against the White House."

Later, Racist-in-Chief Jesse Jackson, interjects racism into the fray with his racist tweet:
Awful. Jesse Jackson Sr. Calls Darrell Issa a "Racist" for Cutting Off Cummings

Congressman Darrell Issa's behavior was crude, wrong, racist and mean toward Congressman Elijah Cummings. Do you agree?

No, Rev. Jackson, I don't agree. Your racist attempt to stir up hatred epitomizes the Democratic party's divisive behavior and does nothing to be constructive.

Elijah Cummings' behavior shows a lack of maturity and a blatant attempt to grandstand and score political points. His comments demonstrate his desire to make a statement, not ask a procedural question.

May I make my statement?

You would think the Democratic Party, who's history spans the length of this nation's existence, would be able to conduct itself with maturity and civility. But no. This morally bankrupt shell of a party must resort to childish tantrums, lies, slander, and manufactured claims of racism to remain relevant. It would be funny if it wasn't so destructive. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.


Posted by Weary_Willie at March 9, 2014 11:38 AM
Comments
Comment #377236

Cummings wanted to make a political statement because the Democrats see Issa’s investigations as witch hunts. I think Issa was wrong to cut him off and it made him (and his party) look like sourpusses, though that may have been the desire that Cummings had. While I think he was wrong, it was his chair and he could do it if he wanted to, he was just rude about it. He apologized and Cummings accepted his apology, so no big deal there, other than the media on both sides trying to use it for political fodder and to sell advertising, such is the deplorable state of our 4th estate.

However, Jackson calling the action ‘racist’ is a much bigger story and issue than you give it here in your article. This is a systemic issue that the Democrats have that is just going to end up biting them in the rear. Polls show that the left is getting creamed now in support by younger people who see through the tired rhetoric and ignorant statements like that. Almost half of the country now identifies themselves as independent because of the actions of the two major parties.

All this does is make Jackson look like the race baiter he is (and because it was the black caucus that complained, it appears to be a coordinated effort by the Democrats) AND it makes real charges of racism appear as noise on the ever-increasingly ignored heap. In fact, Jackson is setting race relations back because he loses power if they actually move forward… And he wants his name in that paper, that’s his ego driving his decisions lately it seems, not anything resembling fairness and reality. If MLK were alive today, he would take his old friend out back and slap him silly.

Congrats Jesse, you’ve wasted away a chance to do something meaningful in regards to race and set the movement you claim to lead back years… This country is becoming decidedly less racist despite your best efforts to keep that going for personal gain. You have become a blight on humanity.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 9, 2014 12:33 PM
Comment #377237

Gee, what a surprise.

Jesse Jackson is and has always been a drama queen. This is nothing new and I can’t quite see any point here, other than to bash away at a party you disagree with.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 9, 2014 12:46 PM
Comment #377238

Oh, and BTW,

Has Issa and his multimillion dollar juggernaut actually proven anything?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 9, 2014 12:49 PM
Comment #377240

It’s not over until the fat lady sings, Rocky Marks. (I’m not referring to Lois Lerner)

Correction, I’m not saying Lois Lerner is fat.

Rep. Cummings’ childish outburst is a product of a long history of “hissy fits” the Democratic party uses to bully any opposition to it’s agenda. It needs to be recognized as a bullying tactic and the Democratic Party needs to be called out on it. Rep Cummings’ episode may be small potatoes (tnx, VP Quayle) on it’s own, but the Democratic Party’s use of this tactic is prevalent and repeated.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 9, 2014 1:05 PM
Comment #377241

willie,

“It’s not over until the fat lady sings, Rocky Marks.”

So what you’re saying is that you are incapable, or unwilling to answer the question.

It figures.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 9, 2014 1:39 PM
Comment #377242

Oh, and as far as fat ladies singing.

Issa has had enough time to complete “The Ring of the Nibelung” several times.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 9, 2014 1:52 PM
Comment #377243

I’m saying the documents that have been requested are just recently been released. If all of the documents are forthcoming they may shed light on the situation. It is not the fault of Issa that he has been stonewalled by the administration in his efforts to get the documents requested. It still remains to be seen what comes of it.

In a round about way I’ve just repeated myself. If you can’t or won’t take it as an answer, well, that’s your deficit.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 9, 2014 2:00 PM
Comment #377290

Issa knew she was going to plead out. His ‘questions’ were really just political statements. But, when Cummings wished to do the same, Issa chopped him off. Same old-same old from the crook/arsonist we’ve grown to know and love.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 12, 2014 7:27 AM
Comment #377296

Rep. Issa was told Lerner would testify again. It was only minutes before her testimony did her lawyer tell Issa she would again plead the fifth. For all we know Cummings may have set up the whole thing just so he could have another rant.

Where did you get the crook/arsonist charge, David Stevens? Please provide links to this claim. Don’t be just another ignorant liberal throwing baseless accusations around, ok?

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 12, 2014 11:19 PM
Comment #377301

From Politico:

Issa is a successful businessman whose is [sic] the nation’s largest manufacturer of anti-theft devices in vehicles. Though he and his brother were charged with stealing a car in the 1970s, prosecutors later dropped charges, and Issa said he was a victim in the incident, according to a New Yorker profile of Issa from 2011. After a suspicious fire at his business’s factory, the company’s former owner said he suspected Issa set the fire for insurance, but a cause of the fire was never determined and no charges were filed, according to the profile.

Since Mr. Issa uses phraseology like…

…the administration is still — their paid liar, their spokesperson…he’s still making up things about what happened and calling this a local rogue. There’s no indication — the reason that Lois Lerner tried to take the Fifth is not because there is a rogue in Cincinnati, it’s because this is a problem that was coordinated, in all likelihood, right out of Washington headquarters and we’re getting to proving it…

and…

After weeks of scandal and controversy…
when appearing on a talking head show, it’s is merely extrapolation. If Issa, the king of smear, can use this type of ugly, so can those who believe him to be a ‘crook/arsonist’, because we have the same amount of proof that he has.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 13, 2014 6:22 PM
Comment #377303

When the purpose of your meeting is political, the result will also be political. Issa screwed up, huge, and is now getting the political blowback his actions deserved. I used to see no difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of their choice to put politics ahead of sound policy for the people. But, these last 5 years have become very different, with Republican actions at the federal level becoming almost exclusively political in nature, and Democrat actions rooted in beneficial policy for the majority of Americans. To site just a few, Health care for all, raising the minimum wage, a jobs bill which Republicans killed, a stimulus bill which Republicans killed, and a deficit reducing budget that would have improved quality of life for many, also killed by Republicans.

There is now a real difference between the two parties, and more and more American voters will come to appreciate that difference. A warning to Democrats, resort to politics at your own peril.

Posted by: David R. Remer at March 13, 2014 6:42 PM
Comment #377306
But, these last 5 years have become very different, with Republican actions at the federal level becoming almost exclusively political in nature, and Democrat actions rooted in beneficial policy for the majority of Americans.

*shakes head*

To suggest that the Democrats haven’t been engaging in politics is an interesting view… I would, of course, disagree. It advances their politics to be able to control the healthcare of all Americans as they have done now. The new surgeon general nominee has already stated that gun control should be a health care issue.

Vivek Murthy ‏@vivek_murthy 16 Oct 2012 “Tired of politicians playing politics w/ guns, putting lives at risk b/c they’re scared of NRA. Guns are a health care issue. #debatehealth”
Posted by: Rhinehold at March 13, 2014 8:02 PM
Comment #377309

Hey, David Stevens, if a Republican jumped off a cliff, would you do it too?

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 13, 2014 10:03 PM
Comment #377314

WW,

Was it not the basis of your post that Cummings was in the wrong and Issa in the right within the bounds of the IRS ‘investigation’???

Issa, the crook/arsonist was playing the political cheat/hack with his so-called ‘questions’ to Ms Lerner. Cummings merely wanted his turn at bat.

Issa should be removed from committee and perhaps even from Congress.

Tantrums from the left my foot!

Posted by: David Stevens at March 14, 2014 8:18 AM
Comment #377317

What’s the difference in Issa asking a question and getting a fifth amendment reply and Cummings asking a question and getting a fifth amendment reply?

Nothing.

Lerner’s entire testimony is covered by the fifth no matter who asks the questions.


Cummings wanted to go on another political rant against Issa. Period. Rep. Cummings lied when he said he listened to Issa for 20 minutes. Issa’s opening recap of events lasted less than 5 minutes. Rep. Cummings lied when he said he wanted to ask a procedural question. No procedural question was forthcoming. Instead he launched into personal accusations against Issa. Like I said, Cummings may have orchestrated this whole thing just to force the opportunity to smear Issa again.

Your own comment states no fact whatsoever!

From Politico:
prosecutors later dropped charges,
but a cause of the fire was never determined and no charges were filed

Typical liberal slander from an another ignorant Democratic. When are you guys going to learn this isn’t then 1970’s anymore. You can’t just say it and expect the rest of the world to believe it lock, stock, and barrel. That’s over with. You have to start proving what you say is true. Otherwise you’re just another ignorant gossip.


Posted by: Weary Willie at March 14, 2014 11:16 AM
Comment #377319

WW,

“Typical liberal slander from an another ignorant Democratic.”

Wildest thing said so far on this wild rant post.

I’ve merely pointed out that saying ugly, unsubstantiated things is an Issa trait. That is true. I’ve pointed out that if Issa can ask pointed questions that send a political message, in order to make this administration look bad, then he should be able to absorb the same kind in return. Again, that is true. Then I showed that the committee chairman had used his leadership position in an unconscionable attempt to sway citizen beliefs toward his personal views, rather than use his investigation to get at truths. That is also true.

Typical liberal slander from an ignorant Democrat? Why, THANK you Mr. Issa…er…Willie.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 14, 2014 1:00 PM
Comment #377320

No, the wildest thing said so far is your slander of Darrell Issa. What makes it so outlandish is your belief it is justified simply because you said it.

Issa’s committee has been stonewalled by the administration. It is his duty to pursue the information he requests. It is not the questions that make the administration look bad, but perhaps the answers to those questions. He is not a collaborator that simply lays down and accepts the utterances of the administration like the Democratic lapdogs that take up space on that committee and this blog.

What ugly and unsubstantiated things did Issa say? How, exactly, did you show the committee chairman used his leadership position to sway beliefs toward his personal views? All I’ve seen you do is slander him and call him names. Your idea of proof is hearsay and ignorance of the facts. Your own comment demonstrates that!

Why, You’re Welcome, Mr. Slander Monger, er.. doesn’t even know he’s being manipulated and used as a name-calling puppet.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 14, 2014 2:22 PM
Comment #377321

Rep Issa didn’t know what he was going to be dealing with when he started to have to do that with Rep Cummings. Me thinks he hit a buzz saw like no other in his life. You see Mr. Cummings is a man of stature and dignity. His political acumen is born from his law degree and 19 years experience in the practice of law. He held the office of President Pro Tempore in the Maryland House of Delegates prior to being elected to the US House of Representatives. Mr. Issa however has had more than a few questionable run ins with law enforcement just google it. If it weren’t for the 450 million dollar fortune he has amassed I don’t think anyone would take him seriously as a valid politician. He has become a laughing stock of liberal pundits and has seriously damaged the credibility of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He will not be treated lightly in historical references to the position he has held. Elijah Cummings however has already proven his effectiveness in the political arena by getting Issa to act like an ass when he really should have been more professional.

Posted by: Speak4all at March 14, 2014 3:32 PM
Comment #377322

Oh dear lord…

Elijah Cummings also forgave Issa and moved on. So perhaps he IS better than everyone else, especially the personal destruction force coming to his aid. I think he would be disgusted with some of the remarks made here…

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 14, 2014 3:47 PM
Comment #377323

Forgiving is good, but I don’t think for a moment that Issa will stop. I would agree that Elijah Cummings might not approve of our defense of him however we are not the ones making disgusting comments in that regard, in his defense. All that has been intimidated is that Issa may not have the best or most honest intentions and they he has a somewhat sketchy past when it comes to law enforcement.

Posted by: Speak4all at March 14, 2014 4:13 PM
Comment #377324

WW,

I posted this above, but apparently you failed to understand the motivations for Issa’s use of such blatant innuendo, exaggerations and political hoo-yaw. You say I’ve accused him of saying unsubstantiated claims, etc. The proof is in his own words.

“…the administration is still — their paid liar, their spokesperson…he’s still making up things about what happened and calling this a local rogue. There’s no indication — the reason that Lois Lerner tried to take the Fifth is not because there is a rogue in Cincinnati, it’s because this is a problem that was coordinated, in all likelihood, right out of Washington headquarters and we’re getting to proving it…

and…

After weeks of scandal and controversy…”

By the way, do you think this animosity and vitriol you spew will convince thinking people you are right and just? Personal attacks like those you have aimed at me can sometimes be laid at the feet of the ‘strawman’.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 14, 2014 4:24 PM
Comment #377326

so let me get this straight, the good old All-American IRS “DOESN’T” now have any right to look in on non-profits and not-for-profit outfits across our United States now?

This is wrong on planet what Weary??!!

This is parr for any course of IRS business, this is the way it has always been here in the US. I DETECT RINO FOREIGNERS if not downright Fox flavored Kool-aid drunken weirdos. Are ye’ one?

Posted by: simpleheaded at March 14, 2014 10:23 PM
Comment #377328

Issa calls WH spokesman ‘Paid Liar’ on IRS scandal


“The administration is still - their paid liar, their spokesperson, picture behind - he’s still making up things about what happens and calling this local rogue,” Issa said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “The reason that Lois Lerner tried to take the Fifth [Amendment when called to testify before Congress] is not because there’s a rogue in Cincinnati, it’s because this is a problem that was coordinated in all likelihood right out of Washington headquarters And we’re getting to proving it.

“The administration is still trying to say there’s a few rogue agents in Cincinnati, when in fact the indication is they were directly being ordered from Washington,” he said.

Investigators from two House committees - Oversight and Government Reform and Ways and Means - are questioning IRS workers from the Cincinnati office, and Issa said these interviews provide evidence that the orders stemmed from Washington.
“My gut tells me that too many people knew that this wrongdoing was going on before the election, and at least by some sort of convenient benign neglect allowed it to go on through the election, allowed these groups, these conservative groups, these, if you will, not friends of the president to be disenfranchised through an election,” he said. “Now, I’m not making any allegations as to motive, that they set out to do it. But certainly, people knew it was happening.”

IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Additional scrutiny of conservative organizations’ activities by the IRS did not solely originate in the agency’s Cincinnati office, with requests for information coming from other offices and often bearing the signatures of higher-ups at the agency, according to attorneys representing some of the targeted groups. At least one letter requesting information about one of the groups bears the signature of Lois Lerner, the suspended director of the IRS Exempt Organizations department in Washington.
Two IRS Cincinnati employees who have talked to NBC News dispute one part of the IRS’ explanation, saying that application of inappropriate selection criteria and the extra scrutiny for Tea Party and other conservative political advocacy organizations was not the work of a few low-level “rogue” employees.
“We’re outstanding public servants, dedicated to our craft and to the public we serve,” said one current IRS Cincinnati employee contacted at home over the weekend, who agreed to speak to NBC News on the condition of anonymity. “To suggest that we’re ‘rogue’ should be considered slander.”

That doesn’t sound like innuendo or exaggerations or hoo-yaw now does it, David Stevens? It sounds like IRS employees defending themselves against a political scapegoating. It sounds like IRS employees taking a political beating from the administration’s spokesperson when he makes things up to cover up what actually happened. These IRS employees are calling Jay Carney a liar.

I know I’m not going to convince the partisan blinded anything other than what they already believe. One thing about Democratics, they go down with the ship, loyal to the core. I already said the fat lady has yet to sing. I don’t expect Darrell Issa to slink away with his tail between his legs because of some ignorant slander being pushed his way. He has more integrity than that. He isn’t giving up and he shouldn’t give up just because some bully starts in with the tactics that used to work before, but won’t now.

In the words of Rep. Cummings, “What are we hiding?” What is the administration hiding that it has to send out it’s attack dogs to lie and slander IRS employees? What is the administration hiding that it has to manufacture a character assassination of Darrell Issa?

What are you afraid of, David Stevens, that you can’t wait until the evidence is presented and examined?


Posted by: Weary Willie at March 14, 2014 11:48 PM
Comment #377330

I see, so we should denigrate people based on past history with police hmmm…. I wonder if we should re-examine, let’s say, Edward Kennedy?

This is the biggest problem I have with politics, it’s the personal destruction of the perceived ‘enemy’ instead of just having a difference of opinion and debating the merits or lack thereof of those opinions.

A few examples, in fact… Dan Quayle, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Sarah Bachmann, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, George HW Bush, George Bush, Ronald Reagan…

These weren’t bad or stupid people, they just held a different opinion as their enemies, so they were ‘destroyed’. It didn’t matter that the facts surrounding those destructions were largely made up out of whole cloth, the key was to get people who wanted to believe them to believe them…

You are doing the same thing now to Issa. He’s the choice de jour of the left because he is investigating something that many people find very important. Why not just let him run his investigations and if/when something or nothing comes from it we can move on?

I mean, we already know that what was done by the IRS was wrong. And no, I don’t think he’ll ever discover that it was at the order of the President directly, that’s now how this stuff works. But many Democratic Senators and the President were publicly calling for the IRS to look into these organizations and as a result they did, even though it was wrong to do the way that they did it. Issa believes that there was wrongdoing done at a higher level than has already been discovered and wants to find out, what is the harm in letting him go through the process and see what turns up?

Shouldn’t we be investigating the government at ANY sign of wrongdoing?

I just don’t understand the vitriol, other than for partisan political reasons. Which I suspect is the real issue here, and it’s unfortunate. Had this happened under a Republican president, it would be a completely different story on both sides. That’s the key to see the truth of what is going on here. Heck, Feinstein is still investigating Bush for something that is happening under the current administration, don’t you see a problem here?

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 15, 2014 3:34 AM
Comment #377334

WW.

Apparently I’m no more fearful than you are…for you’ve done the same thing you accuse me of.

And so has Issa. He picks something to investigate on the basis of zilch, blows a bunch of smoke, and when he finds NOTHING, as he’s done so many time in recent years, he continues to belch the same smoke, just because he CAN.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 15, 2014 8:24 AM
Comment #377335

You don’t really read the news do you, David Stevens?

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 15, 2014 10:13 AM
Comment #377336

Below is the Ways and Means Committee transcript of the IRS agent from Aug. 1:

Committee: Today, currently, how do you analyze advocacy cases? If, for example, Tea Party of Arkansas came in today, how would you handle it?

IRS agent: Well, the BOLO list doesn’t exist anymore.

Committee: Sure.

IRS agent: If a political advocacy case came in today, I would give it or talk about it to my manager, because right now we really don’t have any direction, or we haven’t had any for the last month and a half.

——— (break line included in transcript)

Committee: If you saw — I am asking this currently, if today if a tea party case, a group — a case from a tea party group came in to your desk, you reviewed the file and there was no evidence of political activity, would you potentially approve that case? Is that something you would do?

IRS agent: At this point, I would send it to secondary screening, political advocacy.

Committee: So you would treat a tea party group as a political advocacy case even if there was no evidence of political activity on the application. Is that right?

IRS agent: Based on my current manager’s direction, uh-huh.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 15, 2014 2:32 PM
Comment #377338

If I were high up in the IRS, I would treat an application from the Tea Party the same as an application from an organization like the KKK from which it sprang…with a little help from the likes of Dick Armey, and later the Koch boys. The first a charter member of the Southern Good Old Boys Club and the latter Oligarchs/Anarchists.

America voting in a black president created the Tea Party. Had any group actually been interested in our debt and size of government, the Tea Party would have formed up during the eighties when government growth was at its highest and the debt was being doubled. It would not have been formed up when we had gone through the most traumatic financial meltdown since 1929.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 15, 2014 3:19 PM
Comment #377339
References to the Boston Tea Party were part of Tax Day protests held throughout the 1990s and earlier. By 2001, a custom had developed among some conservative activists of mailing tea bags to legislators and other officials as a symbolic act.

The libertarian theme of the “tea party” protest has also been used by Republican Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters during fundraising events in the primaries of the 2008 presidential campaign to emphasize fiscal conservatism, which they later claimed laid the groundwork for the modern-day Tea Party movement. Young Americans for Liberty, with the endorsement of Rep. Paul, organized a protest in late-2008 for January 24 the following year with participants dressing in Native American costumes and dumping soft drinks into New York’s Susquehanna River in protest of former NY Governor David Paterson’s proposed 18% tax increase on soda. As home mortgage foreclosures increased, and details of the 2009 stimulus legislation became known, more organized protests began to emerge.


FreedomWorks originated from a conservative political group funded by David H. Koch called Citizens for a Sound Economy, which in 2004 split into Americans for Prosperity, led by President Nancy Pfotenhauer, and a remainder group which merged with Empower America and was renamed FreedomWorks, led by President and CEO Matt Kibbe. Dick Armey, Jack Kemp and C. Boyden Gray served as co-chairmen of the new organization with Bill Bennett focusing on school choice as a Senior Fellow. Empower America had been founded in 1993 by Bennett, former Secretary of HUD Jack Kemp, former Ambassador Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, and former Representative Vin Weber. In December 2006, Steve Forbes joined the FreedomWorks board of directors

The first of the modern Tea Party protests took place in 2007. It was a combined event, both a protest against the excessive spending of George W. Bush and a campaign event of presidential candidate Ron Paul. Throughout 2008 more of these combined events occurred.

This is important to remember, because while the current state of the Tea Party movement is such to cause many libertarians and other freedom lovers to be a little cautious of the current Tea Party protests, especially those that emphasize the pseudo-patriotism of the current military misadventures in the Middle East, especially the Tea Party Express AstroTurf movement, the history is still noble.

Currently progressive and liberal critics of the Tea Party movement like to ask the question where the protesters were before February 2009. This is asked in order to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the protesters by highlighting how they didn’t protest spending under Bush. This allegedly shows that the protests aren’t based on spending but either on partisanship or on alleged (but never proven) racism.

It is true that after the election many people joined the movement who were not in it previously. It is true that many of these late-comers could have their concern described as partisan instead of fiscal, but certainly not all of them. The same can be said about the reduced attendance in anti-war protests since January 2009.

The history of the Tea Party protests is also forgotten by members of the Republican Party trying to absorb the Tea Party protests with false promises of “enemy of my enemy” and “lesser of two evils” who do not want to recall the true origin of the protests. To acknowledge where the protests came from is to acknowledge the dirty secret of Republican fiscal irresponsibility and to lose the audience they wish to capture.

Tea Party protests and the groups that turned into the current day Tea Party were around long before 2009, but once the Republicans lost the White House, disenfranchised members of the Republican party turned to those organizations, the big bank bailouts, along with the news media looking for something to talk, giving them the press they needed to grow.

If you are going to be an hate-filled partisan tool, David Stevens, you should learn the actual history to avoid looking like an ignorant racist one as well…

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 15, 2014 4:27 PM
Comment #377341

Rhinehold,

I read the same things you just linked to plus several more. BUT, I also lived through the time when the Tea Party as it actually became a political force, and my history lesson is more accurate than yours. And, my assessment of what caused that to happen, when it happened is surely on point.

Racist? Bah! I’ll bet my racism against the originators of the Tea Party racism any day of the week, AND give them spread.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 15, 2014 4:47 PM
Comment #377342
BUT, I also lived through the time when the Tea Party as it actually became a political force, and my history lesson is more accurate than yours.

I guess at the young age of 48, I wasn’t around during the time so I just don’t know… :/

The best you can do is call the people who came late to the party, as it were, hypocrites. The illogical fallacies to claim they are racist is a non-starter and only exhibits your own racist tendencies, I’m afraid.

You seem to forget the vitriol and anger and groups that came hard at George Bush when he was first elected, calling him illegitimate, calling for him to be impeached, etc. Had he been black, the right would have had no better claim to racism in their opposition than the left has now.

In fact, thinking that the only reason to oppose a president is because of his skin color is, in fact, racist… That you even think that tells people a lot about where your mind goes in regards to a person’s views based on their skin color.

A great example is all of the images that existed of George Bush as a ‘chimp’, but when people started using those same images and put Obama’s face in there instead, immediately it was called racist. Just as Jesse Jackson was completely wrong when he called Issa racist because he turned off Cummings’ mike, that would infer that had Cummings been white, Issa wouldn’t have done it. That’s illogical to the nth degree.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 15, 2014 5:01 PM
Comment #377343

BTW, it is my contention that most of the real nefarious racists of today are sitting squarely in the Democratic Party… I’m sure you won’t agree, but when you tell people that they can’t make it on their own, without someone else’s help, because they are black, I contend that that does more to damage a person’s self-image than anything someone from the KKK says…

Personally, I don’t believe in races, other than the human one. I am fully aware that we are all black (we all are descendant from the same black woman living in East Africa some 100,000 to 200,000 years ago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve). I am also keenly aware of my own black heritage from Europe. But you want to label someone like me as ‘racist’ because I disagree with the policies of a President who happens to be partially black?

I would suggest looking in the mirror before starting to make claims on other’s views…

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 15, 2014 5:14 PM
Comment #377344

Rhinehold,

It is not that you are a racist for disagreeing with this president because he is a black man. All leaders are disagreed with about many things over the course of their official position holding. I Agreed with Reagan when he took office and then disagreed with him when he was reelected. Reagan and me are (were) white. But, to hold it against this particular president the negatives that have happened since the mid eighties, the wars that were started by his predecessors, and the horrible downfall of our financial institutions, the naggingly growing debt, the size of government and all of the things we hear from the Tea Party, and at the time we started to hear it all over and over ad nauseam, leads one to the only conclusion possible.

The Tea People wanted the president of the United States to forsake all his own principles, knowledge, experiences and advisors, by groveling at their feet, submitting a downward slanting budget in the time of a great recession, fire half the governmental work-force when there were already signs of an unemployment spiral, and then march to only their drum.

Instead of working with him by submitting logical, pragmatic and practical bills…oh, well skip it. It is frustratingly obvious that those who are eroding this nation are one of two types…those who are so resentful that a majority of voters elected a black president and Oligarchs who now own them lock-stock-and-barrel.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 15, 2014 5:46 PM
Comment #377345

Oh dear lord, David, your views are myopic at best…

This is what George Bush encountered when he was first elected (and haven’t even been inaugurated yet).

https://web.archive.org/web/20001207014200/http://www.democrats.com/

Remember, this website didn’t exist until 2000. It was started by former Clinton staffers who were worried that Al Gore wouldn’t become president. They ridiculed and attempted to personally destroy Bush before he was even elected.

Do you think that Bush was ‘given a pass’ before 9/11? Any pass he did get, which wasn’t very much of one, didn’t last long either.

He was also hung in effigy and threatened with death on a pretty regular basis.

He was blamed for 9/11 (in fact, nearly 40 percent of democrats are still truthers).

He was blamed for the failing economy that he inherited from Clinton.

In fact, he was treated pretty by Democrats pretty much how Republicans are treating Obama.

But, well, he wasn’t half black…

And you want to talk about eroding a nation? Obama expanded the presidential power by blocking attempts to limit warrantless searches, expanded them under the NSA programs we just found out about thanks to Snowden, is keeping nearly 100 people at Guantanamo that have been cleared to be released despite saying he was going to shut it down, tortured suspected spies (as he WANTED to do in Iraq but was thwarted by of all people Bush), will continue to leave troops in Afghanistan until probably his last day in office, ramped up the deportation of illegal immigrants for political power, has done an end around on the constitution on more than one occasion to the point that he has actually be called out on it by the courts, has no respect for the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th OR 10th amendments to the constitution (probably not the 3rd either),

But, well, he’s black so the opposition must be racist…?

Those things are ‘eroding our country’ more than anything the Tea Party or Republican party has contemplated… Or could even hope for.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 15, 2014 6:01 PM
Comment #377347

Rhinehold,

If you won’t reference anything from FOX News I won’t reference anything from MSNBC or Huffington Post. That’s a twofer.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 15, 2014 9:18 PM
Comment #377348

David,

I reference things from MSNBC and Huffington Post as well as Fox. What is important is if the information is accurate and researched, not where it comes from.

If you are that much in the tank, then never mind. You are lost.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 15, 2014 9:56 PM
Comment #377349

Rhinehold,

Okay.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 15, 2014 11:13 PM
Comment #377353

I warned progressives and they just didn’t listen… Once you allow government to get involved in healthcare to this level (of the ACA) you open it up for those with opposing views to get in on the act…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/11/michigan-rape-insurance_n_4428432.html

Michigan lawmakers passed a controversial measure on Wednesday that will ban all insurance plans in the state from covering abortion unless the woman’s life is in danger. The law, which takes effect in March, will force women and employers to purchase a separate abortion rider if they would like the procedure covered, even in cases of rape and incest.

Supporters of the “Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act” argue that it allows people who are opposed to abortion to avoid paying into a plan that covers it. Opponents have nicknamed it the “rape insurance” initiative, because it would force some women to anticipate the possibility of being raped by purchasing the extra abortion insurance ahead of time.

An so it continues… *sigh* The folly of government involvement in areas it does NOT belong.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 16, 2014 11:33 AM
Comment #377354

Rhinehold,

Okay on the anti government rant as well.

Posted by: David Stevens at March 16, 2014 12:59 PM
Post a comment