Watch this clip of Patrick Cassidy and the great Victor Garber sing "The Ballad of Booth" from Sondheim's Assassins and tell me what you think of some of that Birther/Anti-Government/Tea Party rhetoric we've had to suck up these last several months.
RightWingWatch
Glenn Beck and Jerry Boykin discuss Grover Norquist's role as the conservative front man for the Muslim Brotherhood! http://t.co/n2G1KiVw
We both missed blogging the 50th Anniversary of JFK Sr being elected, his assination, and John Jr 's 50th Birthday! Having said that, I was a Democrat, when that party existed! I am glad to see the Tea Party is gaining momentum, as Democrats and Republicans pretend people feel a real belonging to them, the Tea party is alive and well! I want a woman for President, aka, Sarah Palin, unless Tracy Morgan agrees to be our first running around naked President! As Lennon said "So this is Christmas...and what have we done?" We didn 't end wars, give gay rights, get inflation down or get jobs, as in 08, a sa Democrat, I vowed would happen-- with Hillary! Now, the Tea Party gets their chance!
Spiriteddona: We both missed blogging the 50th Anniversary of JFK Sr
Oh please, it's really not that simple and you know it.
One party is out to make the rich richer and the other one is thinking more of the poor and the middle class, the first can't govern and are retrogrades while the second are spineless and are too afraid to call it like it is. Neither is perfect but one is much worse than the other, the lesser of two evils being much better than the worst of the two.
Fernando: Oh please, it's really not that simple and you know
The spineless theory, I used to fall for that, back when I used to watch too many opinion corporate t.v news, where other people formulated my opinions and I thought they were my own. Carrol Quigley used to talk about how the left right paradigm was the perfect system to fool a country into following the hole of divisions when not understanding the continued agenda. While some small things might change, the bigger more important agenda stays the same. Thats why, as LA Weekly film critic noted correctly after watching the movie Inside Job and seeing how Bill CLinton and Obama, Bush, others hire the same cronies into their administration of the past administration that they were so "against". He then stated that after seeing images of Bill Clinton hugging Larry Summers, Hank Paulson shaking hands and laughing with Timothy Geithner, etc. etc etc, he finally understood the permanent government in this country. One that changes administrations, but global agenda stays the same.
GuiltD: The spineless theory, I used to fall for that, back
Fernando
faved
you are correct.......................but lt me tell you that it is extremely difficult for Dems because they want to help the millions of people .while GOP needs only to help the fewer RICH
It is even more difficult now for the Dems because there is no money ..........
so what we should do is at least SUPPORT them with our VOTES............and they will find more backbone if they feel We the People will at least BACK them with our VOTES.
Look what happened in the NOV election...................millions did not bother to vote ?!!!!
NAMI: Fernando faved you are correct.......................but lt me tell you that
Boy, this little 'ol video has really got you going, huh Sparky? You've been coming back here for 5 days with your snide remarks about Alec's profession and point. Now you're acting like you just got here for the first time. Says a lot more about you than it does about him.
triplettam: Boy, this little 'ol video has really got you going,
Americans are their worst enemies. A lot of Americans today are just not good people, they're not nice, they're hateful and they're angry.
The hate and venom of the Teapublicans is a cancer and it will grow and spread and there will be no cure. But, it will eventually take them out. God don't sleep.
lovbug: Americans are their worst enemies. A lot of Americans today
Read the right wing blogs and listen to right wing radio and media, you will see get your answer and see the difference. HP have nothing to do with that. Fail.
lovbug: Read the right wing blogs and listen to right wing
What you see in Liberals is not hate so much as it is anger. Angry at whatever it is that dares to insult the idea that a society can and must include in it's doctrines and practices, deliberate and genuine efforts to promote the general welfare of all. Booth's one dimensional view of America was, insanity.
penndl: What you see in Liberals is not hate so much
Here is the difference between GWB and Obama. GWB claimed to be a compassionate conservative and wanted to change the tone in Washington and work together with democrats. He did not try at all to do those things he claimed. After 9-11 he allowed all the hatred and fear from the neocons to co-opt his administration. Obama also campaigned on working with the otherside and truly embracing bi-partisan legislating. Unfortunately the republicans would not even meet him in the middle. Their entire agenda from the time he was elected was to attack and say no. He still embraces a bi-partisan approach and that is what has made the left wing of his party mad.
firstcougar1: Here is the difference between GWB and Obama. GWB claimed
But I disagree with the premise of your last sentence. President Obama is not merely "embracing a bi-partisan approach," but is embracing the mandates of his leadership as President of the United States and of ALL Americans.
It's one thing for the Congress to choose to be bi-partisan or not; but a well-meaning President does not necessarily have that choice. Of course, he can choose to be the President of Democrats, as Bush chose to be the President of Republicans; but that's not the kind of President that America deserves, and I think President Obama knows this.
As the President of all Americans, President Obama is the President of Republicans as well as Democrats, of those who will never support him as well as those who will always support him, and of those who want to see him fail as well as those who want him to succeed. And the means by which he is attempting to extend himself to all Americans, on both sides of the aisle, is to extend himself to their representatives in Congress.
Apparently, we became so used to the dictatorial partisan leadership that we endured under Bush for 8 years, that we somehow began to perceive that as the norm. But in reality, it was both cowardly and offensive to the office of the presidency and thereby to the electorate whom he served.
Yet unfortunately, because Bush and his rubber-stamp GOP congress got everything they went after and shoved it down throats as well, we now for some reason see that type of governing as a strength, thereby looking upon Obama's effort to reach out to all Americans as a weakness.
What President Obama is doing isn't easy, it isn't popular, and some of us even tend to see it as "abnormal." But he's doing what he was elected to do when he was elected to the highest office in our land, which is to serve us all, even those who didn't vote for him.
The people who should be mad are the Republican base whose representatives have abrogated their responsibilities as elected public servants and have chosen instead to serve their own self interests, which is to destroy this presidency by any means necessary, even if it means bringing the country down in the process.
On the other hand, we - as Democrats - should be proud of our President's courage and tenacity in his effort to be the kind of President and leader and statesman that our party and our country deserves, even in the face of the obstruction and rejection that his Republican colleagues seem intent upon subjecting him to.
Let the Congress choose to be bi-partisan or not; but let our President be the President!
StillIRise: I agree with most of your post ...<br> <br>But I disagree
I keep hearing all this rhetoric about how the Tea Party grew out of conservative disatisfaction with current state of political affairs in America. They were fed up with the same old, same old games being played by the politicians connected to the established political parties. They wanted more responsibility. They wanted their version of integrity. They wanted change.
Sound familiar? That`s exactly the sentiment that propelled Obama`s left wing campaign to the White House. But as we`ve seen with Obama, the new guys aren`t immune to the disease that infects our democracy.
The guys with the most money call the shots. Always have. Always will. Power corrupts. Aboslute power corrupts absolutely. The Tea Party will be no different. But they may be more dangerous.
TonyOnly: I keep hearing all this rhetoric about how the Tea
Regardless of the rhetoric you hear, today's Tea Party did not grow out of "conservative dissatisfaction with current state of political affairs in America." That may have been the principle concerns of the Libertarian Tea Party movement of the recent past; but it was not the principle concerns of today's Tea Party uprising that began just 3 months after President Obama assumed office.
Today's tea partiers saw the opportunity to use the annual Libertarian Tea Party event against President obama, quickly usurped the their platform to twist it into their own, and took to the streets in protest against this President months before even his first policy became manifest.
Their blatant hypocrisy lies in their enduring support, not only through the 8 years that President Bush pushed our economy to the brink of despair, or through the 30 years of an unrelenting assault on the middle class from Reagan to Bush, but even now in their support of the very same people and the very same party that created this mess in the first place.
Ultimately, when one sheds all of the guises they have used to camouflage their true motives, their version of integrity and change in our government is to remove the black man from the White House.
Therefore, while everything else you say about the similarity between Democrats and Republicans and the money and the power and the potential for corruption and the danger of the Tea Party ... may indeed all be true ...
There is absolutely no comparison between this Tea Party movement and the sentiment that propelled Obama's campaign to the White House.
StillIRise: Another post I agree with ... EXCEPT ...<br> <br>Regardless of the
Obama was "propelled" (some would say shoehorned) into office by every special interest group that had its hands in the till...including subsidized private sector interests who were the first in line to feed at the trough the minute HizGratenezz took office.
jabailo: Obama was "propelled" (some would say shoehorned) into office by
I think historically low approval ratings for Congress show that we need more parties. Conservatives found a non-mainstream voice in the Tea Party. Now how about liberals?
The TP stands for Fiscal Responsibility, Limited Government and Constitutional Conservatism. So your Anti-Tea-Party Party be Anti-Fiscal Responsibility, Pro Big Government Bureaucracy and Unconstitutional Liberalism.
Good Luck!
GJCO-JMH: The TP stands for Fiscal Responsibility, Limited Government and Constitutional
Interesting parallel. We have not come so far as we would like to think. There is still too much hate. I had hoped with the election of Barack Obama that there would be less. This is somewhat true. However, the hate is more virulent, more verbal and condoned by the both the likes of palin and the tea party and too what must be recognized as the mainstream republican party.
Dianekkdi: Video unavailable at this time. I found it on Youtube,
The video has been pulled.
One party is out to make the rich richer and the other one is thinking more of the poor and the middle class, the first can't govern and are retrogrades while the second are spineless and are too afraid to call it like it is. Neither is perfect but one is much worse than the other, the lesser of two evils being much better than the worst of the two.
faved
you are correct.......................but lt me tell you that it is extremely difficult for Dems because they want to help the millions of people .while GOP needs only to help the fewer RICH
It is even more difficult now for the Dems because there is no money ..........
so what we should do is at least SUPPORT them with our VOTES............and they will find more backbone if they feel We the People will at least BACK them with our VOTES.
Look what happened in the NOV election...................millions did not bother to vote ?!!!!
The hate and venom of the Teapublicans is a cancer and it will grow and spread and there will be no cure. But, it will eventually take them out. God don't sleep.
If you don't believe me, just read HP completely.
But I disagree with the premise of your last sentence. President Obama is not merely "embracing a bi-partisan approach," but is embracing the mandates of his leadership as President of the United States and of ALL Americans.
It's one thing for the Congress to choose to be bi-partisan or not; but a well-meaning President does not necessarily have that choice. Of course, he can choose to be the President of Democrats, as Bush chose to be the President of Republicans; but that's not the kind of President that America deserves, and I think President Obama knows this.
As the President of all Americans, President Obama is the President of Republicans as well as Democrats, of those who will never support him as well as those who will always support him, and of those who want to see him fail as well as those who want him to succeed. And the means by which he is attempting to extend himself to all Americans, on both sides of the aisle, is to extend himself to their representatives in Congress.
Apparently, we became so used to the dictatorial partisan leadership that we endured under Bush for 8 years, that we somehow began to perceive that as the norm. But in reality, it was both cowardly and offensive to the office of the presidency and thereby to the electorate whom he served.
Yet unfortunately, because Bush and his rubber-stamp GOP congress got everything they went after and shoved it down throats as well, we now for some reason see that type of governing as a strength, thereby looking upon Obama's effort to reach out to all Americans as a weakness.
What President Obama is doing isn't easy, it isn't popular, and some of us even tend to see it as "abnormal." But he's doing what he was elected to do when he was elected to the highest office in our land, which is to serve us all, even those who didn't vote for him.
The people who should be mad are the Republican base whose representatives have abrogated their responsibilities as elected public servants and have chosen instead to serve their own self interests, which is to destroy this presidency by any means necessary, even if it means bringing the country down in the process.
On the other hand, we - as Democrats - should be proud of our President's courage and tenacity in his effort to be the kind of President and leader and statesman that our party and our country deserves, even in the face of the obstruction and rejection that his Republican colleagues seem intent upon subjecting him to.
Let the Congress choose to be bi-partisan or not; but let our President be the President!
I've been a follower for some time. I now consider myself a fan!
: )
Sound familiar? That`s exactly the sentiment that propelled Obama`s left wing campaign to the White House. But as we`ve seen with Obama, the new guys aren`t immune to the disease that infects our democracy.
The guys with the most money call the shots. Always have. Always will. Power corrupts. Aboslute power corrupts absolutely. The Tea Party will be no different. But they may be more dangerous.
Regardless of the rhetoric you hear, today's Tea Party did not grow out of "conservative dissatisfaction with current state of political affairs in America." That may have been the principle concerns of the Libertarian Tea Party movement of the recent past; but it was not the principle concerns of today's Tea Party uprising that began just 3 months after President Obama assumed office.
Today's tea partiers saw the opportunity to use the annual Libertarian Tea Party event against President obama, quickly usurped the their platform to twist it into their own, and took to the streets in protest against this President months before even his first policy became manifest.
Their blatant hypocrisy lies in their enduring support, not only through the 8 years that President Bush pushed our economy to the brink of despair, or through the 30 years of an unrelenting assault on the middle class from Reagan to Bush, but even now in their support of the very same people and the very same party that created this mess in the first place.
Ultimately, when one sheds all of the guises they have used to camouflage their true motives, their version of integrity and change in our government is to remove the black man from the White House.
Therefore, while everything else you say about the similarity between Democrats and Republicans and the money and the power and the potential for corruption and the danger of the Tea Party ... may indeed all be true ...
There is absolutely no comparison between this Tea Party movement and the sentiment that propelled Obama's campaign to the White House.
Besides this attempt
http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/
all I hear is whining about the Tea Party.
Good Luck!
-J. Brown, "Sex Machine"
Interesting parallel. We have not come so far as we would like to think. There is still too much hate. I had hoped with the election of Barack Obama that there would be less. This is somewhat true. However, the hate is more virulent, more verbal and condoned by the both the likes of palin and the tea party and too what must be recognized as the mainstream republican party.