America's Political Transformation

Don't know how many of you here are famaliar with the "Tea Party" movement in America. It is a grassroots movement amongst Americans - not affiliated with either political party - with a conservative, capitalist, and nationalist agenda - against all potential interference from outside America.

Well a result of recent elections in New Jersey, and Massachusetts, provides a full proof of a giant political transformation in the United States. America is waking up to its weaknesses and shortcomings, tapping back at its roots and foundation. Although Republicans won in impossible states like New Jersey and Massachusetts - they should not start celebrating yet. People are fed-up with both parties, and a closer look at winners such as Scott Brown, shows exactly what type of people will be running America in the future.

Originally posted by Tusi Don't know how many of you here are famaliar with the "Tea Party" movement in America. It is a grassroots movement amongst Americans - not affiliated with either political party - with a conservative, capitalist, and nationalist agenda - against all potential interference from outside America. Well a result of recent elections in New Jersey, and Massachusetts, provides a full proof of a giant political transformation in the United States. America is waking up to its weaknesses and shortcomings, tapping back at its roots and foundation. Although Republicans won in impossible states like New Jersey and Massachusetts - they should not start celebrating yet. People are fed-up with both parties, and a closer look at winners such as Scott Brown, shows exactly what type of people will be running America in the future.

I can only agree with both of you and I was happy to see the results but will he compromise? Michael Savage thought he is only a man and a politician to boot, so don't put too much faith in him. He may dispoint some people and compromise with the liberals in some areas. I hope he is tough on terroism though and yes I support gun rights.

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba Originally posted by Tusi Don't know how many of you here are famaliar with the "Tea Party" movement in America. It is a grassroots movement amongst Americans - not affiliated with either political party - with a conservative, capitalist, and nationalist agenda - against all potential interference from outside America. Nothing about this statement is true:a) the Tea Party movement is NOT a grass roots movement, it is a political movement sponsored and encouraged by conservative organizations, and is now promoted on Fox News which advertises for it and encourages people to attend by giving times and the location of future protests. Nothing about the movement is grass roots...b) the movement is affiliated with a political party, the Republican Party, and on a broader level Conservatives as a whole.c) it is a movement composed of almost, if not entirely, conservative whites who may or may not harbor some racist feelings (I believe many of them do)d) they are not against political interference from outside America, they're against what they perceive is the nation's progression away from White American and towards a multi-cultural more liberal America, which is inevitable. Originally posted by Tusi Well a result of recent elections in New Jersey, and Massachusetts, provides a full proof of a giant political transformation in the United States. No, it simply shows that people are still ignorant enough to believe that a two party system works and simply switching between the same two parties will make a difference... Originally posted by Tusi  America is waking up to its weaknesses and shortcomings, tapping back at its roots and foundation. No, the only thing the the Tea Party Movement shows is that there are still people in this country who do not want the country to progress and adapt to global changes but would rather cling to an outdated backward ideology that simply does not work.

No disrespect but what can you expect from a progressive liberal!! I will address this later but I must rush off now. Your asssesment is totally wrong about the real facts and sounds like liberal propaganda. Look what happened in Mass? Scot Brown!!



thesaudavoice.com

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba I have no problem being progressive. As a matter of fact, its been "progressive liberals" who have created the world we live in today. Through out history, it has been "progressive liberals" who have created the social conditions which we enjoy today. Conservatives have always put up a fight (a fight that is simply a waste of time and energy for all sides and really pointless), but they always loose in the end. Being a person interested in history, you should know this

Edited by Cryptic - 22-Jan-2010 at 10:34

Originally posted by Cryptic   This is an oversimplification.  History shows that "Progressive Libererals" are just as prone to tyranny as conservatives.    For example, the Boshelvicks, Chairman Mao, and Pol Pot were progressive liberals who created new and modernised social conditions for the enjoyment of all.  Their social doctine was presented as natural and inevitable.  All those who resisted were simply "wasting their time".

I never said otherwise and I agree that some progressives have created even worse conditions but for the most part, its because of progressives that we live in the world today. Lenin's intentions were good, but his system didnt work, for example. Martin Luther was a progressive for his time, he started the movement which eventually weakened the power of the Church and lead to secularism down the line...

progressives have always beaten out those who wish to hold on to outdated ideas because the world changes, and we must change with it.

Originally posted by eaglecap Pure propaganda and most tea party people are independents who are sick of the Neo Con Globalist Republicans like Bush and Mcknuckles – oops I mean McCain.

Most tea partiers are conservatives and sympathize with the Republican Party. Most of them voted for McCain and Palin, and most of them would vote for Palin in 2012, no matter how idiotic that is.

They are conservatives and Republicans, they are not "independents".

Originally posted by eaglecap  Savage came up with a better term for Progressive liberals that fits better neo-commies.

Neo-commies? In what way? This reminds me of the term Islamo-Fascist right? But them I wouldnt expect much from a fear mongering conservative such as Savage.

Originally posted by eaglecap    There is a difference with the Republican party my parents supported as well as the Democrats. By Today’s standards John F. Kenney is conservative and if things were still like the early 60’s I would possibly be a Democrat.

Well yea, things change every decade and America was a lot more conservative in the 60's than it is now, and it was even more conservative in the 30's and even more in the 1890's and so on.... but because of progressive liberals, things changed for the better (atleast in my opinion) and America has become a much better place.

John F. Kennedy was a progressive liberal for his time.

Originally posted by eaglecap  I don’t really know your politics or if you support Marxism so excuse me for labeling you right away.

Do I believe that Marx's world will one day become reality? I already see it happening. If you know what Marx says, then you know that the Soviet Union is not a good example of Communism and Marx would never have approved or believed that Russia was ready for that step, which it was not.

Originally posted by eaglecap They are composed of mostly whites because guess who pays most of the taxes. I have seen non-whites involved and to most tea party supporters it is not about race and all are welcomed.

Taxes? Thats is one of the worst reasons I've heard. If it was about taxes, wouldnt there be a proportional amount of everyone represented? 

Its not about taxes, the overwhelming majority, if not all, of these protestors are 1) conservatives 2) white. A lot of them are also either racist or not too fond of "non-American's" (non-whites).

Originally posted by eaglecap I don’t agree with multiculturalism and see it as a threat to the unity of this nation. I believe in the melting pot! I support people passing on their language and culture to their children and grandchildren but we are all Americans first and foremost.

I agree.

Originally posted by eaglecap When I see another person whether they are black, white, Hispanic, Asians- I only see an American period. I have Native American roots so racism is something I hate but you find it in all groups, I am aware that some tea party people are racist. I believe most are not and racist are not welcomed period. Funny- I am not even part of this group but only sympathetic to their cause. I am sure some tea party supporters I would also disagree with.

Not racist? Check this out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/16/10-most-offensive-tea-par_n_187554.html

and these signs were held up at these rallies openly and proudly, and none of the other protesters said anything and organizers did nothing to stop them.

I can show you more pictures if you like.

Originally posted by eaglecap  I do believe in a Social safety net as long as it is not abused.

Why do you think it'll be abused?

Originally posted by eaglecap I also get tired of people using the race card all the time. If someone always brings up race then I wonder who is the real racist!!

I agree, people should not use the race card when it doesnt apply.

Originally posted by eaglecap Look at the current spending of Obama which is worse than Bush, who I also disliked.

What? Do you not know anything about the current state of the country? Bush left Obama with three things:

1) an expensive war, WHICH OBAMA HAS TO PAY FOR
2) a recession and economic crisis, WHICH OBAMA HAS TO PAY FOR
3) problems with health care and social security, WHICH OBAMA HAS TO PAY FOR

1 and 2 are because of Bush, and you're blaming Obama for spending the money to fix these problems? You gotta be kidding me!

Originally posted by eaglecap    Many Tea party people are anti Bush

Most of them voted for Bush.... and for McCain and Palin....

Originally posted by eaglecap  and as far as being grass roots many own small businesses which are the back bone of our nation.

What does that have to do with grass roots? These protests and the movement are not grassroots, they are organized by conservative organizations, this is a known fact!

Originally posted by eaglecap  The number one thing is it is their constitutional right to protest!! There is only one party- the Democans and Repulicrats controlled by the globalist elite.

They have their right to protests, and they can waste all the time they want spewing out their filt, racism, lies, and fear mongering, but the educated American will not stand for it.

Historically, the conservatives always appeal to the lower and less educated classes, and progressives always appeal to the educated. This is because its always the less educated that fears change and conservatives can easily manipulate them. But like I said before, progressives have always come out on top, and it wont be any different now.

Most of these tea partiers think that Palin will make a good president and that she is an intelligent woman... this country is doomed if tea partiers actually had a say in anything.

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba progressives have always beaten out those who wish to hold on to outdated ideas because the world changes, and we must change with it.

Edited by Cryptic - 22-Jan-2010 at 14:24

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba Originally posted by Cryptic   The progressive Marxists and Maoists were themselves beaten by the old "reactionary" beliefs amd concepts that they thought would be eliminated. Marxist idea's have not been "beaten". Today, you can already see Marxist idea's winning out throughout the developed world. Eventually, I predict, Marx's idea's will come to fruition because it makes sense.

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba Originally posted by Cryptic   I doubt it.  Europe as already taken steps back from socialism. Even France has re examined some its long held socialist policies.  Ditto for Scandanavia. Europe is the old developed world.  South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia and Singapore seem to have rejected many aspects of European socialism.   At the end of the day, socialism only works in the small scale where it is completely voluntary. In the west, Monasteries have practiced socialism for centuries.  Kind of ironic, the few successful practioners of socialism are religious.  Yet what did Marx say about religion?     Interesting. So what type steps are France and the Scandinavian countries taking or what are they re examining?

TGS, wrote the following;

"Lenin's intentions were good, but his system didnt work, for example. Martin Luther was a progressive for his time, he started the movement which eventually weakened the power of the Church and lead to secularism down the line...

progressives have always beaten out those who wish to hold on to outdated ideas because the world changes, and we must change with it."

Lenin's intentions did not work? How about Stalin's?

You know TGS, that there is an old saying which, I would guess, most of you Socialists either ignore or since you educational level is so high, that you have forgotten or discarded years ago! It is; "The road to perdition is paved with good intentions!" Hell, Hitler had them, so did Castro and Che', so did Mao, so did Mussolini, and Pol Pot! All of the above could easily be classified as "progressive socialists!"

Well, it seems that they succeeded in "progressing" about 200 million people out of their lives! (note two hundred million may not be correct, but what true progressive gives a shit about a few million or so?)

Do you believe that George Bernard Shaw gave a shit? Hey, he was the poster child for "progressive socialism!" As is Che', Mao, and all of the others mentioned!

Of course America has had its share of progressives, I would guess that A. Jackson, and T. Rooseveldt, and "the president who would keep us out of war" was one of the best?

President Hoover, however, would not make your list!

But President Barry Obama, probably would? Oh! I am sorry, it seems he gave up his childhood nickname "Barry", a few years ago!

But, don't worry about it, he still has a close group of "progressive" advisors, heck one even used to promote "bombing Federal Offices", and "Power plants", and "communication towers", etc.!

Hey, a guy like that can surely be called "progressive" can he not?

I for one, wonder why?

Oh! I must modify the above post by stating what TGS will soon be writing! It surely will began by mentioning that I am a respondant from the "racist state of Mississippi"!

Come on TGS, I just know you can't help but mention it? Laugh!


Edited by opuslola - 23-Jan-2010 at 16:16