Forget all the democratic propagated drivel about how tea partiers are for less government, thusly less taxes. Well that’s true.
But about the “All for myself, the hell with everyone else”.THAT IS JUST A PLAIN FLAT OUT BOLDFACED LIE.
I had the honor of attending a spaghetti supper fundraiser for a friend whose house burned down last month. My friend is a well known Republican, who is also a tea party force in her area.
Over 200 people crowded into a small Polish hall to dine, mingle with good friends, and make some new ones all to help out a friend in need.
EVERYTHING was donated. From local businesses, to just plain individuals wanting to help.
So much for the awful stereotypes promoted by democrats who want to cut social service to our most needy, and just want to “hack” for their own gain.
I’d much rather cast my lot with people who show they care about their neighbor, rather than democrats who now only just talk a good game.
I’d help a friend in need too, regardless of politics; I’m sure we all would. Still don’t understand how you think the GOP is better for the disadvantaged in terms of public policy though. They vote against better health care, against unemployment, against minimum wage, etc. etc.
Obamacare is not better. I don’t want a democratic hack bureaucrat deciding my life or death.
Dems were AGAINST unemployment when it suited their political agenda last month.
Etc. Etc.
…but assuming your false choice I’d take a Democratic hack government bureaucrat over an insurance industry hack for-profit bureaucrat any time.
Went to anybody who had been to TEA Party meetings, etc.
<
p>I sent 20 bucks, and I never heard of the people.
used to be a bunch off conspiracy loons tossing the 911 commission report into Boston Harbor before the marketing think tanks go ahold of it.
I believe a significant measure of a political movement is how it treats those outside the immediate identity group. What’s distressing about the Tea Party isn’t that they don’t take care of their own, it’s their narrow definition of who deserves help or support. No reasonable commentator is accusing the Tea Party membership of being so self-interested that they wouldn’t offer help to a (prominent, well-connected, “worthy”) fellow human being in need, but the group’s broader agenda is to end “entitlements” for a subset of people they’ve deemed unworthy of such support in order to keep their own taxes down. This is a fundamentally self-interested position, and an admirable gesture like this spaghetti dinner doesn’t change that fact.
.. that tea party health care.
And the accompanying death panels.
that has to be the joke of the year
…as well as making the Loch Ness Monster head of billing, and requiring that the Green Giant sign of on all requested MRIs.
Friends help friends. Donors can be convinced to help innocents — especially if cute. Helping friendless people, nope. Helping homeless alcoholics, nope. Helping adults who made bad decisions, unlikely — unless mixed with a noxiously high percentage of religious proselytizing. There’s a reason animal rights groups feature bunny rabbits and doggies on their ads and skip over the moles.
<
p>So yeah, go ahead, billxi, and imagine that Tea Partiers care about other people.
<
p>They’ll care about you too as long as you look innocent, cute, and worthy.
<
p>Do you?
<
p>And do they not think that the American with Disabilities Act is an unconstitutional meddling into states’ rights?
<
p>I bet they do. I bet they do.
Cute or innocent. I don’t want a democratic hack death panel deciding my worth. Would you want me making your life or death decision?
The event was in an inaccessible building. Assistance was promised to me so I could attend.
… in the ACA. You’re apparently easily manipulated.
I’ll say it again: the Tea Party regards the American with Disabilities Act as unconstitutional.
<
p>You don’t want legal protection. You want to rely on the charity of others — despite being neither cute nor innocent.
<
p>Remind me not to take political advice from you because you are clearly incapable of evaluating your own self-interest.
I’ve been to several meetings, and never heard anything remotely like that.
<
p>And please remember – there is a distinction between the education group that has membership in MA, and the corrupt lawyer in CA.
<
p>And before you say it’s all the same – I don’t think all Democrats in MA are on the take because some of them are and have been convicted.
…the Tea Parties have a reputation for not wanting the government to assist the disadvantaged, or to do anything that is not enumerated in the Constitution. There is no constitutional charge for the federal government to prohibit discrimination or ensure access for people with disabilities.
Is that all you got? There is no constitutional statute for a lot of things.
Way to display your true prejudicial colors. Are you gonna kick a wheelchair on your way home to feel big?
… has pointed out at your own peril. These people are not the friends of spending – you know, like ADA spending. They’d rather it be done ‘voluntarily’ by ‘private’ spending and ‘charity’. All Christopher is doing is pointing it out.
and pointing out a logical inconsistency. One of, if not the most important, plank in the TP platform is the “strict construction” view of the Constitution, specifically with regard to the 10th amendment. To paraphrase many leading TP’ers :” If the constitution doesn’t say the federal government CAN do something, then it CANNOT”. Am I correct in that interpretation?
<
p>You will notice however, if you were paying attention when the GOP read the Constitution on the House floor, nowhere does it say the that the federal government can mandate the things that the ADA mandates. Things like mandating businesses provide reasonable accommodations for employees. That private business set aside parking spaces for the handicapped. That cities and towns install ramps for wheelchair accessibility. Therefore, under the TP interpretation of the Constitution, the ADA is unconstitutional, and so are those socialist mandates.
<
p>
<
p>Pretty well sums up the issue, and the logical inconsistency.
<
p>So next time you’re slurping spaghetti with your TP pals and you’re all patting yourselves on the back for defending the Constitution, think about those “lot of things” that some/many/most of you want, need, depend on that have no “constitutional statue”.
<
p>And before your get all cholericy and vinegary, again, think about who got you the ADA (or the programs to pay for your PCA). It was us commie/pinko/socialist/fascist/unamerican/constitution hating liberals.
<
p>You’re welcome.
President George H. W. Bush!
NPR:
Paul does not contradict Siegel and later explains:
The Tea Party’s opposition to regulation extends to the advocacy for salmonella.
The law requires ‘reasonable accomodation’ and a first floor office would satisfy that. Local regulation IS by and large better. I’m sorry, KB, but that really doesn’t rise to ADA repeal.
would be sufficient to satisfy the needs of a disabled person. But, what if meetings are held upstairs? Would the disabled person be left out of important gatherings and brainstorming sessions, influential decisions made because some employees had access to other floors that the disabled person didn’t. What if the boss’s office is on the 2nd or 3rd floor? While it’s a great idea, it would never work.
Office place politics would pulverize the disabled person and they wouldn’t stand a chance.
Mr. Paul only follows the logic of the Tea Parties stated preferences to their conclusion. As Matt Taibbi pointed out in his Rolling Stone article, Tea Party enthusiasts include lots of retirees on Medicare and Social Security — who seem to think both programs should be dismantled. Just like Billxi, they do not understand their self-interest.
<
p>Similarly, if one wants a country with a small federal government, that’s neither Federalist nor Whig, that’s small and highly respectful of the independence of the states, the ADA and, yes, the Civil Rights Act too over-reach. They are unconstitutional, extraordinary misinterpretations of the Commerce Clause.
<
p>And if we are to follow the rather odd religiosity with which these guys (Palin included) now surround the Founding Fathers, you’d think that Jesus Himself handed the Constitutional Convention the document fully written out. So by returning to those principles, even if any rational person would think it moronic, we will attain grace as a nation, freedom will blossom, and, God will reward us with prosperity.
<
p>It’s as romantic as it is stupid.
Man, you give Millbury a bad name.
With you giving Worcester one.
Congratulations on a good fundraiser for such a worthy cause. I hope your friend gets back on her feet.
<
p>If you’d asked – nicely – many of us might have helped out, that’s the honey part. Instead we get the vinegar and vitriol. Maybe that makes you feel better, billxi.
<
p>What’s your point?
<
p>I get involved in lots of fundraisers, for lots of different reasons. I don’t recall cross checking voter registration lists in deciding who to help, or ask for help. It’s never discussed.
<
p>We’ve got a Medfield Angels group. All volunteers (check it out online). Need something? Just ask, somebody will help. Party registration has nothing to do with it, by the way.
<
p>A friend needs a bone marrow transplant. I have no idea what her politics is, but she needs the help. Bone marrow drive this Saturday at the Turner’s Pond Lodge, Rte. 27 in Walpole near the Medfield line, from 10:00 – 1:00. All it takes is a cheek swab and a blood sample.
<
p>I’ve got another fundraiser coming up for a friend with cancer. Everyone’s invited. March 5th at the Legion hall.
<
p>Politics? Party registration? Don’t ask, don’t tell. Don’t care. People need help, I help. So do most people.
<
p>A little more honey, and a lot less vinegar, would be a welcome improvement, for you and for us.
<
p>Just sayin’
<
p>
<
p>the Tea Party has been hijacked by the corporate elite. The deficit is important, but it’s not the priority for today. The only people who are going to benefit from these deficit hawks controlling our government are those with the most. They are going to benefit by taking away from us, the common people.
<
p>I know a few Tea Partier’s and they firmly believe in Glenn Beck’s sermons stating that it should be charity, not government, that supports those who have fallen on hard times. I believe that it takes a village too. They are good people who have an innocent faith that a smaller government will benefit them, their families, and their neighbors. And surely, it is the common man/woman who steps up to the plate at these local fundraisers and supports their neighbor. I doubt that Goldman Sachs was at the party. But it is the powerful interests like Goldmans Sachs and BlueCross/BlueShield that will benefit most from the hijacked Tea Party’s influence in government.
<
p>Please, just rethink it for a minute. I get what you’re talking about, but it’s not what you’re going to get. It will not benefit you the more hijacked Tea Party candidates you put into office.
<
p>They will take from you; I guarantee it.