Strange, since the Tea Party has been analyzed as not being all that big a deal in the last election. And of those candidates who got elected under that banner, they’re not showing any signs of behaving in line with it, according to ABC News:
“At least 23 current members of congress or their families have received government money for their farms.”
From Salon: “No one would agree to stop taking subsidies – which is sensible, because if the money’s available, why not take it – but more amusingly some of these Tea Partiers wouldn’t even explicitly say they’d vote to end the subsidies, which are almost universally acknowledged as wasteful spending by experts across the ideological spectrum.”
Chuck Grassley, Sam Brownback, and Michele Bachmann have all benefited from farm subsidies as well, even though they hate all that socialism.
^ No, it’s socialism no matter who gets the money. They both want the same thing but choose to keep shallow minded people distracted with minor issues.You see the truth but choose only to lambaste the other side.
Nonsense, there’s only one type of socialism: Socialism for the poor. Socialism for the rich is merely called “Trickle down economics.” And I don’t know if you’ve been paying attention, but Trickle-Down works ………. they’re richer, aren’t they? *
Motivemagus about 13 years ago
Strange, since the Tea Party has been analyzed as not being all that big a deal in the last election. And of those candidates who got elected under that banner, they’re not showing any signs of behaving in line with it, according to ABC News: “At least 23 current members of congress or their families have received government money for their farms.” From Salon: “No one would agree to stop taking subsidies – which is sensible, because if the money’s available, why not take it – but more amusingly some of these Tea Partiers wouldn’t even explicitly say they’d vote to end the subsidies, which are almost universally acknowledged as wasteful spending by experts across the ideological spectrum.” Chuck Grassley, Sam Brownback, and Michele Bachmann have all benefited from farm subsidies as well, even though they hate all that socialism.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tea-party-hypocrisy-lawmakers-tea-party-ties-government/story?id=13259014&page=1
Kingoswald Premium Member about 13 years ago
“Do as I say not do as I do”. The usual right-wing story.
Nebulous Premium Member about 13 years ago
It’s only Socialism if MY money goes to them. If THEIR money comes to ME, it’s only what I deserve.
DesultoryPhillipic about 13 years ago
^ No, it’s socialism no matter who gets the money. They both want the same thing but choose to keep shallow minded people distracted with minor issues.You see the truth but choose only to lambaste the other side.
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
The ‘Big Important” Tea Party rally in DC yesterday drew an estimated crowd of 200.
FOX News tried to blame it on the weather. ( Rain and drizzle )
http://tinyurl.com/3eu4c7m
Fine, except…
A recent protest rally in Madison ( against Scott Walker’s union-busting bill ) drew an estimated crowd 70,000
In the snow!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/31/962107/-Fox-News-and-todays-tea-party-rally
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
^You can always tell when a teabagger has no argument.
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
Point, DesultoryPhillipic.
Both sides may practice that kind of Socialism, but only ONE side came to power attacking Socialism.
That’s the difference…and THAT’S what we’re lambasting, the hypocrisy of the right.
Jaedabee Premium Member about 13 years ago
Nonsense, there’s only one type of socialism: Socialism for the poor. Socialism for the rich is merely called “Trickle down economics.” And I don’t know if you’ve been paying attention, but Trickle-Down works ………. they’re richer, aren’t they? *
pirate227 about 13 years ago
Pass the popcorn.