ANOTHER weekend, another grass-roots demonstration starring Real Americans who are mad as hell and want to take back their country from you-know-who. Last Sunday the site was Lower Manhattan, where they jeered the “ground zero mosque.” This weekend, the scene shifted to Washington, where the avatars of oppressed white Tea Party America, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, were slated to “reclaim the civil rights movement” (Beck’s words) on the same spot where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. had his dream exactly 47 years earlier.
Vive la révolution!
There’s just one element missing from these snapshots of America’s ostensibly spontaneous and leaderless populist uprising: the sugar daddies who are bankrolling it, and have been doing so since well before the “death panel” warm-up acts of last summer. Three heavy hitters rule. You’ve heard of one of them, Rupert Murdoch. The other two, the brothers David and Charles Koch, are even richer, with a combined wealth exceeded only by that of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett among Americans. But even those carrying the Kochs’ banner may not know who these brothers are.
People who have worked hard for their money don't particularly want Robin Hood to come take it and share it.
They would prefer to offer those less fortunate a job and let them earn it.
OMG. That is awful.
So now they are putting their money into stopping what they believe is wrong. That is terrible.
Wayne Harrison wrote: ANOTHER weekend, another grass-roots demonstration starring Real Americans who are mad as hell and want to take back their country from you-know-who.
No who? Everyone in the government who is fiscally irresponsible? Everyone in the governemnt who trys to change our Constitution? Everyone in our Government who feels that the Government can take care of us better than we can take care of ourselves as a society? Everyone in government who is trying to turn us into a socialist nation? Both Democrats and Republicans alike. Many of these 'Real Americans' have already defeated quite a few Republicans. They forced Crist to change parties. So I guess when you say 'you-know-who', that is who you mean right? Because I know you are not like all the others who are trying to make this all about Obama which then leads to how this is all about race. I know you aren't trying to put spin on the Tea Party like that and paint them into a nice little box of being just a bunch of people who don't like Obama. Hope we cleared that up.
Becky wrote: People who have worked hard for their money don't particularly want Robin Hood to come take it and share it.
They would prefer to offer those less fortunate a job and let them earn it.
OMG. That is awful.
So now they are putting their money into stopping what they believe is wrong. That is terrible.
and yes....I would agree.
Carry on!
I agree. I am glad people with a lot of money are finally putting it behind a cause to fight 'for' Americans and our rights and freedoms and our Constitution.
The Viking wrote: Everyone in the governemnt who trys to change our Constitution?
Would that be like the right-wing wackos that want to amend the First Amendment because they don't like Muslims having their freedom of religion? Or the 17th Amendment because they don't like the citizens being able to elect their own Senators? Or the 14th Amendment because "Equal Protection under the law" covers too many groups you don't like?
You mean like THAT "everyone who [sic] trys (tries) to change our Constitution?"
The grammar police are back. Why is it when someone disagrees with another....they attack the grammar? Is it an attempt to diminish someones belief or ideas by pointing out that they are somehow to stupid to use good grammar so therefore their thoughts should be discounted?
Just curious.
Good grammar shows upbringing or education. It also shows if a person who can't spell (like me) is lazy enough not to use a spellchecker to correct their mistakes. How many words were misspelled in the Declaration of Independence?
Some people talk about the Tea Party as if it's some magical cure for the country's problems.
I embrace having a third party, but I don't think a bunch of third-party candidates in Washington will really be able to affect any real change. We run the country with political system we have, complete with lobbyists and fat cats who bankroll their chosen candidates. Politicians are more beholdin' to the lobbyists and corporations who finance them than to the people who elected them.
Less government is a great idea, but it has never happened, no matter what party is in control. A bunch of third-party outsiders are certainly not going to be able to margically change that. Still, it's a nice dream.
