Remember When ALL The "Tea Party" People Were Saying "We Wan't Our Country Back!?!"

[Harry Dresden]

First, I thought the TP was nothing but whackjobs (media & internet portrayals). Then it kept lasting. Then I learned more. Then I met some TP's. And I thought they were reasonable intelligent people.
Then the TP evolved. Now it's not what it says it is. The statement in bold above is where I have found that to be true.

The TP wants the govt. to follow the USC?
So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?
Or is it that I should be allowed to own nuclear weapons?
Gays should have the right to marry and adopt?
People from other countries should be allowed to live here as long as they like, unimpeded, but simply won't enjoy the benefits of citizenship?

I could go on with a dozen other examples but the point is clear.

The TP doesn't want the government to follow THE Constitution, they want the government to follow THEIR INTERPRETATION of the Constitution. And they're so danm arrogant about having some secret magical knowledge of what it means - i.e. INTERPRETATION, while claiming it doesn't need to be interpreted.

OWS is just starting and it's growing a hundred times faster than the TP ever did. I have no friggin' clue what it will turn into but unfortunately, I'd bet it ends up corrupted the same way as the TP has been. Start with a simple message. Then you need actual leaders. Those leaders are approached by say AT&T for instance (like with the TP). Next thing you know, they're lobbying on behalf of Big Business...
I doubt OWS will be able to avoid that inevitibility.

So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?


read the 2nd sentence in the 2nd Amendment.....it might clear things up for you....

 

[IndependntLogic]

First, I thought the TP was nothing but whackjobs (media & internet portrayals). Then it kept lasting. Then I learned more. Then I met some TP's. And I thought they were reasonable intelligent people.
Then the TP evolved. Now it's not what it says it is. The statement in bold above is where I have found that to be true.

The TP wants the govt. to follow the USC?
So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?
Or is it that I should be allowed to own nuclear weapons?
Gays should have the right to marry and adopt?
People from other countries should be allowed to live here as long as they like, unimpeded, but simply won't enjoy the benefits of citizenship?

I could go on with a dozen other examples but the point is clear.

The TP doesn't want the government to follow THE Constitution, they want the government to follow THEIR INTERPRETATION of the Constitution. And they're so danm arrogant about having some secret magical knowledge of what it means - i.e. INTERPRETATION, while claiming it doesn't need to be interpreted.

OWS is just starting and it's growing a hundred times faster than the TP ever did. I have no friggin' clue what it will turn into but unfortunately, I'd bet it ends up corrupted the same way as the TP has been. Start with a simple message. Then you need actual leaders. Those leaders are approached by say AT&T for instance (like with the TP). Next thing you know, they're lobbying on behalf of Big Business...
I doubt OWS will be able to avoid that inevitibility.

So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?


read the 2nd sentence in the 2nd Amendment.....it might clear things up for you....

Yup. Read it. So what? It clearly and literally ties a "well-regulated militia" to the right to bear arms. Or wait. Maybe that's a matter of interpretation? Perhaps the fact that the well-regulated militia sentence is literally part of the 2nd Amendment, doesn't actually mean that you have to be part of one to bear... "arms" or armament.

ar·ma·ment (ärm-mnt) n. 1. The weapons and supplies of war with which a military unit is equipped.

Ah. Okay. So then I should be allowed to make nukes in my basement! Mount machine guns on the hood of my car! Woohoo! Grand Theft Auto here we come!
Gays should have the right to marry and adopt?
People from other countries should be allowed to live here as long as they like, unimpeded, but simply won't enjoy the benefits of citizenship?

Hard to escape the fact that the USC is interpreted. The only people claiming this is not the case, are the people saying their interpretation is the only valid one...

 

[alan1]

Your OP denied the premise/point of the Tea Party that you now admit exists.
Your disagreement with that premise/point does not remove the point nor make me "deranged".
Perhaps you should re-write your OP and use some honesty.

My apologies for calling you deranged MountainMan.

There was no need for that, I got carried away there and was out of line.

With that said, I'm a bit confused as to what you mean.

My point is simply that the Tea party people are being their usual dishonest and disingenuous selves with this insistence of a main message from the OWS when they themselves were rather radical and unstructured in their messaging at the beginning of their own movement...for well into a year at that.

So to have those same people now come back to us with this meme is rather ridiculous. Dontcha think?

I guess we just see things differently.
When the TEA Party came out, their main premise was Taxed Enough Already (TEA). To me, that was a pretty clear message.

Apology accepted, I understand how that happens, I get away myself at times.

 

[Si modo]

First, I thought the TP was nothing but whackjobs (media & internet portrayals). Then it kept lasting. Then I learned more. Then I met some TP's. And I thought they were reasonable intelligent people.
Then the TP evolved. Now it's not what it says it is. The statement in bold above is where I have found that to be true.

The TP wants the govt. to follow the USC?
So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?
Or is it that I should be allowed to own nuclear weapons?
Gays should have the right to marry and adopt?
People from other countries should be allowed to live here as long as they like, unimpeded, but simply won't enjoy the benefits of citizenship?

I could go on with a dozen other examples but the point is clear.

The TP doesn't want the government to follow THE Constitution, they want the government to follow THEIR INTERPRETATION of the Constitution. And they're so danm arrogant about having some secret magical knowledge of what it means - i.e. INTERPRETATION, while claiming it doesn't need to be interpreted.

OWS is just starting and it's growing a hundred times faster than the TP ever did. I have no friggin' clue what it will turn into but unfortunately, I'd bet it ends up corrupted the same way as the TP has been. Start with a simple message. Then you need actual leaders. Those leaders are approached by say AT&T for instance (like with the TP). Next thing you know, they're lobbying on behalf of Big Business...
I doubt OWS will be able to avoid that inevitibility.

So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?


read the 2nd sentence in the 2nd Amendment.....it might clear things up for you....

Yup. Read it. So what? It clearly and literally ties a "well-regulated militia" to the right to bear arms. Or wait. Maybe that's a matter of interpretation? Perhaps the fact that the well-regulated militia sentence is literally part of the 2nd Amendment, doesn't actually mean that you have to be part of one to bear... "arms" or armament.

ar·ma·ment (ärm-mnt) n. 1. The weapons and supplies of war with which a military unit is equipped.

Ah. Okay. So then I should be allowed to make nukes in my basement! Mount machine guns on the hood of my car! Woohoo! Grand Theft Auto here we come!
Gays should have the right to marry and adopt?
People from other countries should be allowed to live here as long as they like, unimpeded, but simply won't enjoy the benefits of citizenship?

Hard to escape the fact that the USC is interpreted. The only people claiming this is not the case, are the people saying their interpretation is the only valid one...

Too bad for you the SCOTUS has already interpreted that - "law abiding persons".

 

[MarcATL]

Your OP denied the premise/point of the Tea Party that you now admit exists.
Your disagreement with that premise/point does not remove the point nor make me "deranged".
Perhaps you should re-write your OP and use some honesty.

My apologies for calling you deranged MountainMan.

There was no need for that, I got carried away there and was out of line.

With that said, I'm a bit confused as to what you mean.

My point is simply that the Tea party people are being their usual dishonest and disingenuous selves with this insistence of a main message from the OWS when they themselves were rather radical and unstructured in their messaging at the beginning of their own movement...for well into a year at that.

So to have those same people now come back to us with this meme is rather ridiculous. Dontcha think?

I guess we just see things differently.
When the TEA Party came out, their main premise was Taxed Enough Already (TEA). To me, that was a pretty clear message.

Apology accepted, I understand how that happens, I get away myself at times.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that that was their only message? That at that time the most LOUD and FREQUENT message wasn't "We want our country back?" And that there was not a lot of unwarrented 2nd-Amendment concerns from these people at that time as well?

Is that what you're suggesting?

 

[alan1]

My apologies for calling you deranged MountainMan.

There was no need for that, I got carried away there and was out of line.

With that said, I'm a bit confused as to what you mean.

My point is simply that the Tea party people are being their usual dishonest and disingenuous selves with this insistence of a main message from the OWS when they themselves were rather radical and unstructured in their messaging at the beginning of their own movement...for well into a year at that.

So to have those same people now come back to us with this meme is rather ridiculous. Dontcha think?

I guess we just see things differently.
When the TEA Party came out, their main premise was Taxed Enough Already (TEA). To me, that was a pretty clear message.

Apology accepted, I understand how that happens, I get away myself at times.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that that was their only message? That at that time the most LOUD and FREQUENT message wasn't "We want our country back?" And that there was not a lot of unwarrented 2nd-Amendment concerns from these people at that time as well?

Is that what you're suggesting?

No.

Please read the part in red, above. That is what I am telling you.

 

[MarcATL]

I guess we just see things differently.
When the TEA Party came out, their main premise was Taxed Enough Already (TEA). To me, that was a pretty clear message.

Apology accepted, I understand how that happens, I get away myself at times.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that that was their only message? That at that time the most LOUD and FREQUENT message wasn't "We want our country back?" And that there was not a lot of unwarrented 2nd-Amendment concerns from these people at that time as well?

Is that what you're suggesting?

No.

Please read the part in red, above. That is what I am telling you.

We do see things differently.

At the time that just one amongst many things they were screaming.

Furthermore, that was nonsensical of them to be saying in the first place. Taxes is, and had been at that time already, the lowest in modern history.

The argument is baseless...even now.

 

[IndependntLogic]

So only those who are part of a "well-regulated militia" will be allowed to bear arms?


read the 2nd sentence in the 2nd Amendment.....it might clear things up for you....

Yup. Read it. So what? It clearly and literally ties a "well-regulated militia" to the right to bear arms. Or wait. Maybe that's a matter of interpretation? Perhaps the fact that the well-regulated militia sentence is literally part of the 2nd Amendment, doesn't actually mean that you have to be part of one to bear... "arms" or armament.

ar·ma·ment (ärm-mnt) n. 1. The weapons and supplies of war with which a military unit is equipped.

Ah. Okay. So then I should be allowed to make nukes in my basement! Mount machine guns on the hood of my car! Woohoo! Grand Theft Auto here we come!
Gays should have the right to marry and adopt?
People from other countries should be allowed to live here as long as they like, unimpeded, but simply won't enjoy the benefits of citizenship?

Hard to escape the fact that the USC is interpreted. The only people claiming this is not the case, are the people saying their interpretation is the only valid one...

Too bad for you the SCOTUS has already interpreted that - "law abiding persons".

Why too bad for me? I own a gun. But I do thank you for proving my point for me...
(See bold above)

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Communists, Socialists and Marxists completely reject the notion that we are taxed and regulated enough