What does that have to do with the topic? It's a private company, not a government "plan." If people want to make a fuss about it, they should write the company involved.
Thomas Paine presents and even more unlikely hero for the teabaggers. Not only was he fiercely anti-religious, he was an 18th century Michael Moore - progressive taxation, minimum wage, free public education for all - those are all grounds for a swastika & sickle over in 'baggerland.
this is the path i took, flawed logic and all: and the IPPR's aim is to produce research to inform policies that can drive global change that is sustainable, fair, democratic and secure for all. At the heart of ippr’s Global Change programme is rigorous, but politically informed and pragmatic research and advocacy. - http://www.ippr.org.uk/ certainly it is just one company across the pond, but the UK parliament could be influenced by the think tank... which leads me to think our congressional "leaders" might like to hop on board with this plan, or add it in to some sort of cap and trade bill. conspiracy? far fetched? perhaps, but look what else the tea party participants believe.
i forgot to add my main point. if this were implemented, it would be just one more way for the government to stick it's nose in to our personal lives, and limit our personal freedoms.
If they are trying to portray the spirit of the American Revolution, then what is the problem with that, as long as it's nonviolent? People are getting sick of the government's excessive taxing, spending, and making policies that the majority of the country are opposed to. They are finding out that their votes, letters to their Congressman, and peaceful protests are futile. In response to the bolded: What's the problem with the sign? Coming to a demonstration with a weapon (as long as it's legal, even though the Constitution grants us the right to), is not a violent act. The ironic part is that DC basically has the strictest gun laws yet has an absurdly high crime rate. If I were going to a protest, I would definitely come armed, especially with what went on at the G20 summit recently. Military Illegally Arresting Citizens at G20 (Violation of Posse Commitatus Act) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8CNa_viKg0 I'll point out that this video has 321 views and 147 comments, according to Youtube. They are blatantly distorting the hits to avoid this stuff making the front page of the site, which is nothing new for them. Why would they fear this info being public? Military Attacks American Citizens With Sound Weapons & Tear Gas At G20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAwmX5O-FAE&feature=player_profilepage#t=39 Our government is blatantly breaking the law in our faces, I think it's acceptable to be ticked off, to say the least. It is a matter of time before things get violent at these protests, and I definitely wouldn't throw out the possibility that a violent protest could be provoked/staged by the CIA to discredit these types of movements and to take away more of our rights, since it's happened before.
And who perchance are "the people that shouldn't be helped"? I think I know the answer but you may want to be more specific. I know it is not the top 1% wealthy that you are talking about.
People love to repeatedly ask this question, aka playing the 'blame game', instead of actively looking at the facts, which is that this is a nearly full blown police state with a borderline tyrannical government. The answer, though, is that people have bought into a false 'left/right paradigm', the historical textbook strategy for any fascist takeover of a nation. You take two candidates with ultimately roughly the same policies, but market them as totally different. One of them wins, and the regime remains the same, albeit with slightly different rhetoric and packaging. Both candidates are always bought and paid for by campaign contributions and would not be there unless they were willing and able to play the game. Their reward is ultimately a great deal of power, and money. Look at the brilliant marketing of the Obama/McCain election, you have a young, well spoken 'black' candidate vs. an old, grumpy war vet. Classic polar opposites on the surface, but Obama has merely extended a lot of Bush policies. The teabaggers were mostly silent during this era because they have herd mentality, and worshipped Bush in a similar way that people now are worshipping Obama, and will rarely to never speak out against him. It's a 'my team is better than yours' mentality, and it was intended to be this way, in order to keep us busy and distracted from the fact that our country is being slowly taken over by banks and corporations.
They are finding out peaceful protests are futile? I think they are finding out an ill informed minority aren't able to change the way government is being run despite their spirited ill informed protests. What's wrong with portraying the spirit of a revolution? They aren't doing a re-enactment out there. They are implying they will actually revolt. Taxing has gone down for almost everyone, and is better for everyone now than it was under Ronald Reagan. The majority of the country are in favor of a public option and health care reform. The civil rights marches were peaceful and effective. Would you have supported the Black Panthers showing up carrying weapons? Do you think the govt. at the time would have allowed that? We are more free today than we were then. Thank goodness.
so you admit that you supported the last 8 years of ull blown police state with a borderline tyrannical government
Wait... we lived in a police state during the last eight years? "The term police state describes a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive. The inhabitants of a police state experience restrictions on their mobility, and on their freedom to express or communicate political or other views, which are subject to police monitoring or enforcement. Political control may be exerted by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional state." I had forgotten about all those protests of Bush that were stomped down by the military, and all those secret police banging down my door for thinking that Bush was a fiscal idiot. Give me a break, I bet you can't name one single thing that Bush implemented besides airport security that effected your life in any way. You're being as melodramatic as the birthers.
Anyone who believes the government is preparing for a "fascist takover" or that Obama is a socialist/fascist and simply succumbing to a knee-jerk reaction over false rhetoric, primarily spewed out from Republican outlets. They're also ignorant fools that are over-dramatizing the change in ideology in the government, one that I feel will be for our benefit. Then again, I'm all for a Norway-like approach where taxes are raised but there is universal health care and whatnot. Unfortunately, American politicians are too corrupt for such a thing to be successful here, and the American people are too idealist and stupid to figure out the benefit of it and harp on buzzwords like "socialism". That's why I think I'll move to Canada. While their country is somewhat of a joke, at least the people and aren't completely r****ded and the government isn't so corrupt.
Man, I'm glad I don't live my life filled with paranoia. With all due respect, it must be tough to be you.
