h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Is the Tea Party Movement essentially a veiled far-right "prejudiced" movement:

1) First black (mulatto) US American voted into the Presidency - sworn in January 2009.
2) First national protest from the Tea Party - February 2009.

Looking at the members coming out in support - they seem to be all white.

Political pundit Stephen Colbert recently
suggested the Tea Party was just an image
and branding make-over for the klan.

Their white hoods were losing visual impact
with the rise of the new hoodie phenomenon
which was also causing some confusion about
just who was who hiding inside a hoodie.

~jwf~

Colbert speaks "truthiness"

The tea party were mostly older white folks.
They often had signs saying keep your government away from our Medicare and Social Security.
They did not seem to understand the Medicare and Social Security programs.

The Tea Partiers were also big on wanting to see President Obamas "real Birth Certificate"
Those people are still out there, proded on by Donald Trump these days.
Many are the pro guns ,pro-religion, anti-gays.
Formerly known as the religious right, the evangelicals.....
often found in the Southeastern U.S and Texas

Some Religious folks are voting for President Obama after the 47% video of Romneys.
Unless they are staunch pro-life votes, it is happening to some degree
I would love to see this group jump ship by voting for the " values" of our President!

There are 2 topics in which President Obama dissapoints me greatly.
I refuse to write about them until after the electionbecause he needs to win.

Yes it does. In the third paragraph:


"Later research showed that by the standards requested by the Gore campaign in their contest brief or by the partial statewide recount set by the Florida Supreme Court, Bush would have likely won the recount anyway.[3] However, the same research indicates that had the statewide recount included all uncounted votes (overvotes as well as undervotes), as seems probable based on later statements by the judge overseeing the recount and supported by faxes made public in November, 2001, Gore would have won the election.[3][4][5]"


Frankly I'm content to say that it was just an extremely close election. I don't think Bush "stole" it. And there's no use crying over his victory now, what's done is done.

post 36 Mr X "the…article concludes that if the recounts had been completed, they probably would have resulted in a victory for Bush…"

post 37 Clare "No. it doesn't"

post 44 Mr X "Yes it does"

"Later research showed that by the standards requested by the Gore campaign in their contest brief or by the partial statewide recount set by the Florida Supreme Court, Bush would have likely won the recount anyway.[3] However, the same research indicates that had the statewide recount included all uncounted votes (overvotes as well as undervotes), as seems probable based on later statements by the judge overseeing the recount and supported by faxes made public in November, 2001, Gore would have won the election.[3][4][5]"

________________________________________________________________

Clare in this post "No, it doesn't, it says in the last phrase there "GORE WOULD HAVE WON THE ELECTION"

Clare in this post "The quote you offer does not back up your statement"

Clare in this post "Finally, remarking on people crying, about what happened in 2000, serves no purpose because MY initial remarks earlier in the thread were about how what the republicans are doing now is what they did then. It serves as a warning to those confused as to how things went down then and how they are going down now. I did this because it seems there are a lot of people who are confused about these things. It surprises me that people are confused because Bush took us lower than we have been since the 30's and most people in America are still suffering from his 'presidency.'

It's fine with me if you are content with your opinion, but it is not my opinion which is why I started talking about this to begin with.

So if you want to move on that's fine with me"

Yep, sure, whatever.

So the US President lied during a tv debate but it's ok cos the other guy lied more?

And seeking the endorsement of a dead President?

Don't get me wrong, I think Romney's an arse but Obama isn't exactly knocking his pitches out of the park is he?

What lie did Obama tell during which debate? Which dead president's endorsement?

It seemed to me that the right-wing really hounded the Clintons over everything and anything they could find, while they, the Clintons, were trying hard to run the "country". It seems to me they were a pretty good presendency (two for the price of one - Bill and Hillary). A fem minor shenanigans compared to previous presidents.

So Al Gore had a little of the fall-out from the right-wing "fanaticism" to deal with, but as far as I could tell everything about him was exemplary: plenty of experience, an intellectual, safe in terms of "playing away", from a well-respected clan. Then he was up against the "runt" of the Bush family - a very sociable fellow agreed, but with too much of the "wheels turning but the hamsters not there" about him. Al Gore should have won by a landslide.

But Al Gore, appeared to lack social warmth, was too wooden, seemed to be almost asocial, had a monotone voice. His aides must have worked on him, but it seemed that he wasn't much of a "sociable" person, had difficulty connecting with the "people" at the social level. A President nowadays has to have that quality about him. Maybe Gore was a good number two but not cut out for the number one job.

I seem to recall Bushes dad getting elected to the Presidency after playing the "race" card against his opponent Dukakis. The continued playing of the evil black man commercial - being released from custody / prison - looking at the camera in an evil and underhand way, with the underlying message that Dukakis was going to release a whole load of black men from prison, who were going to rape your wimmen and shoot you up. I could be talking nonsense, but this is what happened as I recall.

Hi Clare > about the one lie

One comment of President Obamas was inaccurate about Romney in the last debate.
Sorry I forgot the subject, when I recall or find it, I can let you know. I really hate I cannot
remember it

The press said it was a lie
I am not so sure , I think he (O)was just mistaken!
Pundits started the lie talk.
Whatever it's called ,R debating was full of inaccuracies.

I will try an example of political "lies" and fact because it is not always straight forward.
Romneys skin was suddenly darker - a fact.
Why was it darker?
Was it a real tan/makeup/spray tan?
Was he tan for the first time in his life? How odd would that be?
Maybe not odd at all, he was outside campaigning for months.
Was it a devious play to appear 1/6 th hispanic before the debates?
Was it about R's dad living in Mexico for a time? Is that good or bad news on a particular day?

If the truth were known ,would it matter to the outcome of the election?
Depends on what the truth is sometimes,or who hears! Very jaded but true.
Whatever the truth is , whether we can tell or not , it does not change the importance of truthiness.

Oops -some of that was addressing swl /stone art/ clares posts
The ads are getting desperate for R.
It's alot of plain lying now.
I think that means O is winning!

*election burnout*I should be quiet now.

I reckon Obama will be blamed for Hurricane Sandy. Obama seems like a safe pair of hands. Not sure what will happen if Romney gets in. Not sure what will happen if the Tea Party start influencing congress.

The BBC are reporting that fights are breaking out as people queue to fill their waggons with petrol ... with fuel shortages at the pumps. Reckon they might blame Obama for that too. Funny that these same people queuing up for petrol and getting angry are the same people contributing to climate change that will make such hurricanes more likely. However economics will always win in the end.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20177276

With regard to US America they say they have one of the best political systems of checks and balances (separation of executive from the legislature - a tripartite system (Senate, House, President), plus the constitution plus those judges. Checks and balances maybe it is more cheques and balances.

Four years seem such a short period of time for a President to get anything done, but I suppose that is one of the checks to the system.

>> Not sure what will happen if the Tea Party start influencing congress. <<

Since the mid-term elections of 2010, Congress and the Senate
have been constipated into total inaction by the large number
of Tea Party candidates elected. Mostly newbies and with no
sense of the protocols and procedures of government, intent
on nothing but obstructing the policies of Obama.

Among the 'compromises' they did allow through was the so-called
fiscal cliff, a set of draconian budget cuts that would (and will)
come into effect Jan 1, 2013 bringing government to a standstill
if nothing else was done to prevent it.

So far nothing has been done, because the Tea Partiers refuse
to allow any new legislation to be passed. The whirled economy
will drop off the cliff in just over two months.


~jwf~

OMG what is being done about this? What are they doing? What can I do? Where did you get this information so I can go find out more and try to do something to help stop this?

This has GOT to be illegal! If not, it is immoral and attacks our System here. We should just march on Washington and demand the obstructionists be torn from their offices and arrested for disturbing the peace and workings of the United States government. They are attacking our government from within, obstructing the whatever whatever I don't know the lingo fair progress and daily workings of our government. If I went out and... ohhhhh




If I went out and stood in front of all the doors to the building that Congress meets in, so that the congress people couldn't get in, then I would be obstructing the workings of government and you can bet your sweet tea I would be arrested!



The question is, is there anyone left to arrest them?

yep > ditto what jwf said. The tea party has been a big part of the problem.

Congress should have had their pay docked and their medical insurance on pause until they went to work.

Hopefully the balance will change in this election. Some tea partiers are up for re-election.

Now, I might be hazy on the details, but aren't the Tea Party lot annoyed that the USA is getting itself into catastrophic levels of debt. A quick Google gives US debt as $16 Trillion and a deficit of $1.4 Trillion a year. As I understand it, the Tea Party are insisting that Government lives within its means - a laudable aim surely?

Apologies if I'm wildly wrong.

That was the initial attraction, sounds perfect!

People signed up in droves.
They also left in droves due to the not so thinly veiled racism.
and *Grovers No new Taxes Promise.

It's a bit mysterious why so many signed it and then complained bitterly
once they realised the results.
They truly acted as if they cannot go against it.

Sorry I do not remember his full name. He should be easy to find.
Back to a case of the devils in the details....

I am among those whom believe we need to cut costs and raise taxes in spots.
Makes sense in my small personal econmy, I think works for the US too.