Posts Tagged ‘Tea Party’

Is it any wonder why we are starting to hate one another?

Posted by Troy on 15th December 2017 in Human Nature

We are always being played against one another.  Each side picks the worst example of the other side.  For instance, when the Tea Party was rolling strong, the media went out among the crowd and searched for the one guy holding a racist sign.  That’s they guy they showed, and they told everyone watching on the nightly news that the Tea Party was racist.  And the people believed it because they saw the guy holding the racist sign.  There was the proof.  Why did they do this?  Because the Tea Party opposed the Obama agenda, so they had to be destroyed.  Rather than deal with the Tea Party’s legitimate concerns about over taxation and the ever increasing size and power of the government, they knew that it would just be easier to paint them as racist.

The same could be said of the Black Lives Matter movement.  I guarantee you the vast majority of people in that movement have legitimate concerns that the police are killing unarmed young black men.  However, rather than deal with these legitimate concerns, they show the professional looters/rioters that use the movement as cover to do their misdeeds or they show the black equivalent of red necks screaming “What do we want?  Dead cops!  When do we want it?  Now!”  Likewise, rather than deal with the cop supporters who say that the cops are doing their job (etc), they want to talk about systemic racism or white indifference.

The fact of the matter is that if you ever went to a Tea Party event, you would have been amazed at the differences of opinion there.  They were not parrots.  They thought about issues and came to their own conclusions.  And their views were not rooted in racism but rooted in a fear of large government.  And when you get down to it, most of us have an innate fear of large government.  Likewise, if you talked to a black person calmly and rationally about their experiences growing up black and how these cop shootings look to them, then you would understand their point of view.

But even these cop shootings is a further example of media bias.  More unarmed whites are shot by police than unarmed blacks.  A black cop is more likely to shoot a black suspect than a white cop is.  These are statistical facts.  However, you never see when a white cop kills a white guy on the news.  You never see when a black cop kills a black guy on the news.  However, if a white cop kills a black guy, then that’s national news.   This does not excuse bad shootings.  But every time people turn on the TV, they see “white cop kills black suspect.”  They never see those other words.  Anytime they see this, it is always the same scenario.  White kills black.  Over and over and over again.  Again, what is shown to us is what becomes the truth.  How could blacks not learn to fear cops?  Every time they see it, it is confirmation of their belief.  Not only that, but these thoughts and feelings are more likely to make a black suspect nervous or angry which makes it more likely for an escalation during cop encounters which further confirms the belief, and the cycle continues.

And if you dare to discuss anything outside of the pre-determined, pre-approved narrative, you will be shouted down.  Take the cop example above.  If you try to point this out and have a rational discussion, you’re probably going to be yelled at.

I was recently talking to my brother-in-law and mentioned that Song of the South was the only Disney movie never made available to the public.  I’ve always wanted to see it just so I could see why this was.  He basically said it was because there was only one allowable way to depict slavery, and they did not do this.  ie, the slave in question was dance-walking down the road sing “Zippity-doo-da, zippity-aaaaa…”, which is a far cry from the renaming scene from Roots.  I had a conversation with a black friend of mine.  He asked me out of the blue, “Was there anything good about Nazi Germany?”  I had to preface the answer with “Well, it was far outweighed by the mountains of dead bodies and stuff… but he did make the trains run on time, they had national health care, paid for vacations to resorts, jobs for everyone…. but all of this is, as I said… outweighed by the 6 million dead bodies.”  But it’s crazy, isn’t it?   You are not allowed to say anything positive about that time of Germany’s history.  As though saying “The trains ran on time” some how excuses the SIX MILLION DEAD BODIES.  Again, there is only one way you are allowed to discuss the subject.  Anything outside that parameters is not allowed.

We are being trained to regard the other side as horrible human beings.  We are being trained to think the worst of each other.  If people actually sat down and talked, they would find out that we aren’t all that much different.

Long Live the Constitution!

Does McConnell’s Victory Signal the Death of the Tea Party?

Posted by Troy on 21st May 2014 in Current Events, Political

No.  Thank you.  Oh…elaborate?  Fine.  The “Tea Party” is basically a loose affiliation.  That is to say, there are no membership dues.  For the most part, there are no newsletters.  Contrary to popular opinion, there is not even a true cohesiveness of thought.  If you were to actually go to a Tea Party meeting (rather than get your opinions from TV as they like to control what ideas you are exposed to), you would discover that it is a mish-mash of several different philosophies ranging from Conservative to Libertarian.  However, they are all decidedly small government people.  The concept that they are anti-government is ridiculous.  Instead, they are for a small, limited federal government.  They want roads and police…they just want them provided by their state and local governments as the Founders envisioned.  That being said, no “Tea Party” candidate would ever win in Nancy Pelosi’s district.  Does that mean that mean the Tea Party is dead?  No.  It just means that her district is for bigger government with unlimited taxation powers that provide massive social programs (we generally call this “communism,” but we’ll call it “progressive” as they prefer that label when force feeding it to you on national TV).  Likewise, for whatever reason, Kentucky seems to prefer Mitch.  However, I do have some hope for Kentucky as they did elect Rand Paul, a libertarian.  That being said, the true test for Mitch McConnell is if he can maintain his position as the Republican leader in the senate after this next round of elections.  I have a feeling he will be replaced.  In so far as that goes, that is a national choice.  I have always advocated the right leader for the right people.  Ted Cruz would suck if he was representing Nancy Pelosi’s district and vice versa.  We all deserve to be represented…even if you are bat shit crazy.

Long Live the Constitution!

Death of the Tea Party – The Virginia Governor’s Election

Posted by Troy on 6th November 2013 in Uncategorized

Many in the mainstream media are thrilled that the Republican candidate in the governor election for  Virginia was defeated.  They tout that this is clearly a sign of the national rejection of the Tea Party (as the Tea Party endorsed the Republican).  Okay.  First of all, the Democrat did not get more than 50% of the vote.  This means that more people did not want the Democrat than wanted him.  Secondly, about half a percentage point separated the two.  Third, Democrats bankrolled the Libertarian that took about 7% of the vote.  Now, naturally this means the Republican probably would have won as, typically, most people who vote Libertarian are more in line (currently) with Republicans instead of Democrats.  So the verdicts according to Swamp Fox Press?

1)  The Tea Party is alive and well.  Given the amount of outrage by politicians and media types, I would even hazard to say they are doing a good job.  The Green Party is a bunch of wackos.  If they were in charge, things would go to hell in a hand basket quickly.  However, no one takes them seriously.  Why?  Because they’re nuts and they have no power.

2)  The media and politicians will make outrageous claims at any opportunity to try to discredit the Tea Party.

3)  This should end the discussion of third party.  I am a Libertarian at heart, but the only time I vote Libertarian is if I cannot, in good conscience, vote for either candidate (as in the last Georgia governor’s election between Nathan Deal and Roy Barnes).  I believe that the Republican party needs to be broken into three branches: Libertarian or Conservative or Establishment.  This battle should play out in the primaries and the best candidate win.  I believe that the current Democratic party is completely counter to the tenements of the Libertarian Party.  It is impossible to be for a massive socialist system and believe in personal liberty.  The Democratic party has completely embraced socialism (or at least have finally owned up to the fact that they do).  Accepting such a system ties your own private fortunes to that of the government.  When your well-being is dependent upon someone else (even the government’s), then you are no longer free.  Accepting socialism entails higher taxes and a greater degree of government involvement in your life.  There is no way around this.  Also, I believe that an unspoken tenement of Libertarianism is that you can do whatever you want as long as you’re the one paying the cost for it.  That is to say, if you want to smoke, that’s fine, but don’t expect me to pay for your lung cancer treatments.  The Democratic party would say something along the lines of: If you want an abortion, that’s fine, but here…let us pay for it for you.  Now here’s come contraception!  Have fun!

The only though process that does not end in total disaster is that in which you expect people to take personal responsibility for themselves.  This is not to say that you cannot be charitable, but charity comes from the heart and should be awarded to the deserving.  The thing about state “safety nets,” is that they are indiscriminate.  Just by their nature, they must benefit anyone who fits a set criteria.  This means you have to support the deserving and the undeserving.  You have to try to protect the war widow struggling to make ends meet as well as the pothead loser that would rather sit on his ass playing video games all day rather than work.  Personal responsibility stops this, and if you want to use your hard earned money to help the war widow, I applaud your choice.

Long Live the Constitution!

IRS targeting conservative groups

Posted by Troy on 13th May 2013 in Current Events, Political

So, let’s see…Obama has been involved in not one, but two cover-ups (Fast and Furious and Benghazi).  Now he’s also accused of targeting conservative groups using the IRS.  So…how is he any different than Nixon at this point?  Unless you want to use the excuse that Obama had no idea any of this was going on…which makes him incompetent.  That’s always been his defense to everything: “I didn’t know that that was going on.”  So he’s incompetent.  Oooookay…

I’ve filed out a few Form 1023, the application for tax-exempt status.  The kind of questions they are asking Tea Party/Constitution/9-12/Patriot/Jewish groups are not normal questions.  The amount of details they are asking for are insane.  They want resumes for all directors and employees.  That ain’t normal.  They want to have print outs of all posts on their Facebook pages.  What the hell is that?  They want to know how Jewish groups stand on Israel as a country.  What?  And there are even more insane questions than that.

I cannot guarantee that Obama knew about this.  The man seems to have an inexhaustible supply of men who are willing to take a fall for the guy…

On a final note: why is it now that trying to teach about the Constitution is viewed as grounds for discrimination?  Why is demanding adherence to the Constitution makes you a domestic terrorists?   Demanding that is supposed to be every citizens’ duty.  This just serves to show how far we’ve fallen…

Long Live the Constitution!

Terrorism Center at West Point Targets Right Wing Extremist

Posted by Troy on 19th January 2013 in Current Events

Who is a right wing extremist?  Well, hate groups, those who promote individual rights, and those that want limited government.  You can tell a lot by their terminology.  They think that the left is progressive, moving forward.  Meanwhile, those right-wing groups are regressive, moving backwards.  Nevermind that most bombings and other attacks are either lone nuts, left wing groups, or Muslim extremists.  Here is the fact: those who believe in Constitutional, limited government, will not enact change by terrorism.  They will do it by voting.  Revolution, fist in the air, tactics are done by young people who have been taken over by Leftists, Communists, Anarchists, or Fascists.  These are the people that say, “voting doesn’t work.”  If voting doesn’t work, what’s left?

Long Live the Constitution!

Hanging Empty Chairs: Racist Lynchings or Hanging in Effigy

Posted by Troy on 21st September 2012 in Current Events, Political

It must be hard to live in an over-sensitive world.

You have seen the video of Eastwood talking to an empty chair (or heard about it at some point).  This was a bit that people either loved or hated.  It was either brilliant performance art of the act or a senile old man, depending on who you ask.  However, the speech has developed a cult following.  As a part of that following, some individuals are hanging empty chairs from trees.  This has led other people to cry “racism!”  But is it?

Of course, this story has to start with the lynchings which were a part of Southern culture during the Reconstruction Era (mainly).  When a black was suspected of a crime, real or imagined, the community at large would band together and hang the offender without due process of law.  In this case, if an empty chair represents Obama, hanging an empty chair must symbolize hanging Obama.  Since Obama is the first (half)black President, this means that we are hanging a black man!  This, of course, means he is hanging because he is a black man.  Okay, that’s the argument FOR this thought process.

However, there is an older tradition than lynching in this country that dates back to colonial times.  When government officials really angered people, the citizens would hang (or even burn) the officials in effigy.  This is to say, in make believe (not reality).

So, do you think that it is possible that the people hanging these chairs are doing it in political protest rather than showcasing their racial intolerance?  Doesn’t it seem more likely that someone would (in this day and age) opt to show their political outrage to the public rather than show their racism?  I am inclined to believe that this is old-fashioned political free speech at work.

However, let me take the other position.  Let’s just say that it is racism at work.  Evil, evil racism.  Okay, fine.  They are hanging a chair, not a real person.  Even if you don’t like it, it’s legal.  It’s free speech.  You don’t get to approve of all of it.  I am very much against limiting free speech just because it’s offensive be it political, anti-Mulsim, pornography, or anything else.  Once you decide you should be able to determine what thoughts people are exposed to, you have decided that there is no freedom.  There is only what you are allowed to think.

Long Live the Constitution!

Evil Omens?

Posted by Troy on 15th August 2012 in Current Events, Political

Homeland security buys 450 million rounds of ammo.  The Social Security Administration orders 174,000 rounds of .357 rounds, and NOAA orders 46,000 rounds.  Should we be concerned?  First of all, the first one is probably overstated.  They have an open contract over a long duration.  This is probably the maximum number of bullets they can order over the life of the contract.  We only have 311 million.  That’s more than one round per person.  I’d like to think that they wouldn’t need that much ammo.  NOAA claims clerical error.  However, it has come to light that the Army has started training for an insurrection in 2016.  Needless to say, anything we discuss would be pure speculation at this point.  I’m guessing that’s when everything hits the fan and we have drastic cuts to Social Security and Medicare among other things.  In this scenario, they fear riots like in Greece.  I, for one, don’t believe the bulk of us are rioters.  We didn’t riot (at least en masse) during the Great Depression, did we?

So that leads me to a question: when is insurrection okay and when should it be put down?  If you read the Federalist Papers, they do say it is okay to rebel.  Remember, they had just done so.  So here is the thing:  The people have the right and obligation to rebel against a tyrannical government in order to restore the Constitution.  The Army has the obligation to support the people in this matter.  If the people were seeking to overthrow the Constitution, the Army would have the obligation to fight the people.  Members of the military can tell you.  They do not defend America.  They do not defend Americans.  They do not do the bidding of the President or other politicians.  Their sole duty is to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.  As long as they remember that, everything will be okay.

I believe in the Constitution, and I believe in our military which is made up of patriotic Americans.

Long Live the Constitution!

Occupy Wall Street – the Left’s Tea Party

Posted by Troy on 11th June 2012 in Current Events, Political

After seeing the Tea Party’s effectiveness in Wisconsin, Van Jones and Bill Maher want Occupy Wall Street to become the Tea Party.  This is, of course, what the Democrats have been hoping for.  However, OWS has been less than forthcoming in the transformation from rabble to political powerhouse.  First of all, this is against their nature.  OWS is not interested in becoming a voting block for the Democrats.  The “leaders” have already expressed a concern that that would happen and want to operate “outside the electoral process” as it were.  Of course, since that’s the only legitimate way to effect American politics, you really gotta wonder what they have in mind.

I have another question, do you really think that OWS occupying the primary process the way the Tea Party does would help the Democrats?  You have gotta be kidding me.  The Tea Party is considered extreme for demanding Constitutional government and fiscal sanity.  Of course, all the media people will only talk about OWS’s stance on crony capitalism, so they completely ignore the insane levels of socialism the bulk of the protesters want.  So, let’s see…the Republican candidate  get up there and talk about the American Revolution and our Founding Fathers, and the Constitution, and the Democrat candidate gets up there and talks about the French Revolution, Marxism, and Revolution.  Gee, I wonder who would beat the cold crap out of who?

America would always choose the Constitutional candidate against the Revolutionary.  The Tea Party’s dream candidate talks about balanced budgets and Constitutional limits on governmental powers.  The Occupy Wall Street’s dream candidate talks about taxing the rich and making everything free.  The Democrats might as well drop this little pipe dream.  It’s a lost cause either way.

Long Live the Constitution!

Odds are Lugar’s Defeat is None of Your Business

Posted by Troy on 16th May 2012 in Political

Poor Lugar.  Defeated unjustly!  Oh, how foolish of Republicans to bow to the Tea Party.  This surely means that the Republicans will lose everything.

Isn’t it funny how people who are not Republicans are so concerned about the future of the Republican party?

Why is it so important that Republicans have people that reach across the aisle, but it’s okay if Democrats do not compromise?

The fact of the matter is that most of this criticism is coming from outside of Indiana.  As such, they have no business in who the Indiana Senator is.  I despise Nancy Pelosi for so many different reasons, but she is a good Representative of her people.  They adore her.  I can only assume that her district is as wacked out as she is, but she represents THEM, not ME.  Ergo, she should continue to win re-election.

Obviously, Lugar was not representing the Republicans of his district, and thus he was defeated.  It could have been his vote banning “assault” (really cool looking) weapons, his vote for the Brady Bill, his vote for gun lock requirements, his vote to hold gun manufactures responsible for gun deaths, his vote against concealed weapon laws, his vote for amnesty, his vote for the Dream Act, his vote to allow illegal workers the right to receive Social Security, his confirmation of Ginsburg (who believes South Africa’s Constitution is great and ours is a relic) or Sotomayer (who is a proponent of judicial activism and social justice through the court system) or Kagan (who was Obama’s Solicitor General), his votes for unreasonable energy standards (as though you can legislate technological advances) which will cost American companies fortunes in R&D that might not pan out and cause our products to be more expensive, his commitment of climate change (which many do not believe is man-made), his support of cap and trade (which is a method of global socialism more than anything),  his votes for TARP or the auto bailouts, his insane START treaty support, his support of the Law of the Sea Treaty, or his refusal to repeal Obamacare.  I don’t know.  I’m sure they have their reasons.

Senators do not have tenure.  They don’t get to keep their job regardless of their actions and votes.  He voted for these things, and he was held accountable.  Maybe Mourdock will win, maybe he will lose.  Personally, I see no point in electing someone who is willing to sell out our national sovereignty to international organizations.  I don’t think the Democrat could be much worse.  Regardless, once a Senator or Representative stops representing the interest of his people, it is time for them to be replaced.

Long Live the Constitution!

Family Guy’s take on the Tea Party

Posted by Troy on 15th May 2012 in Current Events, Entertainment, Political

This past Sunday, Family Guy decided to take on the Tea Party.  In their opinion, Tea Party members want to completely do away with all government.  I’m going to to guess that Seth McFarland has never been to a Tea Party meeting.  I’m pretty sick of how the Tea Party has been portrayed by the Left.  Bill Maher often makes fun of the Tea Party by claiming that they are a bunch of backwards, racist, hicks.  Juan Williams accuses them often of being racist.  When pressed for evidence, he says “We all know they are.”  Question to Juan Williams, if the police was investigating a robbery and a man comes forward and says, “A black man did it,” and the cops ask if he saw anything and he responded, “No, but we all know it was a black guy;” what would people think of him?  It’s called prejudice, and it doesn’t matter if it’s used on the Tea Party or a black man.  It’s the same thing.  If you believe something of someone without any evidence whatsoever to support that claim, you are a prejudiced bigot.  Clean and simple.

Let me enlighten anyone who would be interested in what the Tea Party actually believes in:  They believe in Constitutional government.  They do not believe in regulatory agencies passing regulations that have the weight of law without any legislative process by duly elected government officials.  They do not believe in international government or giving up our national sovereignty to foreign entities.  They believe in self-reliance.  They believe that states have rights.  They believe that the rights in the Constitution should be protected.  Most Tea Party members I know are against the Patriot Act.  The Tea Party believes in changing the system by primaries, writing Congressmen, and voting (imagine that!).  They believe that we should not devalue the dollar by printing worthless cash until the entire monetary system collapses.  They do not believe in running us into debt and enslaving us to our enemies.  They are against government officials exceeding their Constitutional authority and grabbing power that does not belong to them.

Yeah, the Tea Party is for reducing government.  But there is a LOT of area to be reduced before we get to NO government.  Limited Government is Constitutional Government.  No Government is Anarchy (Check with Occupy Wall Street if you’d like some Anarchy).  And Unlimited Government is Tyranny (check with either political party, especially the Democrats, if you’d like some Tyranny).

Long Live the Constitution!