What Do You Think the Tea Party Movement is About?

[Doktor Howl]

-regarding RP's 'pork' that he earmarks for his district, his answer is that the earmarks do not add any money to the budget whatsoever. 

Sure.  They all say that.

perhaps i should have been more clear....  he was referring to earmarks in general, not his specifically.
Earmarks do not affect the size of the budget.  Some of his supporters criticize this activity saying that it indirectly supports the status quo.  his argument seems pragmatic to me, though...

Re Stang's Rule, your right, but it's a moot point since everything is a product from the moment it is, um.... produced?  what is the implication in the rule?

With all due respect, Iptuous, that's crap.  If the money in the "earmarks" wasn't used for pork, the deficit could be reduced.  Let's be clear, here:  Earmarks are the new word for pork.  If I ran my department's budget the way Rep Paul and his cohorts ran the budget, I'd be out of work and possibly in jail.

For example, if I had X amount of money budgeted, and I decided to hold back what isn't actually necessary, I could improve my plant's bottom line.  That would be the responsible thing to do.

What Rep Paul does is what everyone in congress does, and has done for the last 30 years.  Spend like a bastard, and then point fingers at everyone else, while calling his pork "earmarks" and everyone else's "earmarks" pork.

Representative Paul is a bit of a hypocrite, IMO.

[Doktor Howl]

Re Stang's Rule, your right, but it's a moot point since everything is a product from the moment it is, um.... produced?  what is the implication in the rule?

So the tea party movement was astroturf from the beginning?  I can't say I'm surprised.

[Cain]

The Tea Parties were funded and run, at least in the early stages, by FreedomWorks, a conservative non-profit organization who specialize in astroturfing.  Several other groups associated with the incredibly rich and incredibly conservative Koch brothers, who also fund FreedomWorks, are known to be involved with the Tea Partiers as well.

[Elder Iptuous]

-regarding RP's 'pork' that he earmarks for his district, his answer is that the earmarks do not add any money to the budget whatsoever. 

Sure.  They all say that.

perhaps i should have been more clear....  he was referring to earmarks in general, not his specifically.
Earmarks do not affect the size of the budget.  Some of his supporters criticize this activity saying that it indirectly supports the status quo.  his argument seems pragmatic to me, though...

Re Stang's Rule, your right, but it's a moot point since everything is a product from the moment it is, um.... produced?  what is the implication in the rule?

With all due respect, Iptuous, that's crap.  If the money in the "earmarks" wasn't used for pork, the deficit could be reduced.  Let's be clear, here:  Earmarks are the new word for pork.  If I ran my department's budget the way Rep Paul and his cohorts ran the budget, I'd be out of work and possibly in jail.

For example, if I had X amount of money budgeted, and I decided to hold back what isn't actually necessary, I could improve my plant's bottom line.  That would be the responsible thing to do.

What Rep Paul does is what everyone in congress does, and has done for the last 30 years.  Spend like a bastard, and then point fingers at everyone else, while calling his pork "earmarks" and everyone else's "earmarks" pork.

Representative Paul is a bit of a hypocrite, IMO.

the money is budgeted before the earmarks are put in!  the deficit is determined before the earmarks are made, and they are simply a method of allocating the money congressionally rather than having the executive branch make the calls.  I know don't think that the executive branch is somehow immune from spending the cash on pork projects and cronyism....  
Earmarks are a red herring IMO.  Reducing the bottom line certainly IS the responsible thing to do, and is precisely what RP has been blathering on about for yearsnyears.  That is also why he votes AGAINST the budget bills that he puts those earmarks in.  This is the critical difference between him and everyone else in congress for the last 30 years.  He doesn't approve the spending, so he is fully entitled to point the finger at all the others that do.

[Elder Iptuous]

The Tea Parties were funded and run, at least in the early stages, by FreedomWorks, a conservative non-profit organization who specialize in astroturfing.  Several other groups associated with the incredibly rich and incredibly conservative Koch brothers, who also fund FreedomWorks, are known to be involved with the Tea Partiers as well.

the tea parties were not funded or run by anyone in the early stages.
they were ad hoc things set up by RP supporters in intarweb forums.  i don't know when they became coopted, but i can tell you that for sure...

[Jenne]

Earmarks are red herrings unless there are assholes holding up the works in legislation for DAYS because they wan't kickbacks--I'm sorry--EARMARKS put into the bill.

[Doktor Howl]

the money is budgeted before the earmarks are put in!  

So is my department's money.  If I don't spend it unnecessarily, though, it can be used for other things, or simply added back to the bottom line.

the deficit is determined before the earmarks are made, and they are simply a method of allocating the money congressionally rather than having the executive branch make the calls.

Or you could just, you know, budget for spending bills already passed, instead of piling up the filthy lucre and having everyone just dig the fuck in.  No new rules would be required to do this, but I don't see Rep Paul clamoring for it.

My budget is built on what maintenance expenditures and projects can be foreseen from previous data.  I don't just get a fucking pile of cash every month, and then sit around and think of ways to spend it.  If I can do it, congress can.  But nobody even tries...including Representative Ron Paul.  Mouthing platitudes about taxation won't cut it.

[Doktor Howl]

The Tea Parties were funded and run, at least in the early stages, by FreedomWorks, a conservative non-profit organization who specialize in astroturfing.  Several other groups associated with the incredibly rich and incredibly conservative Koch brothers, who also fund FreedomWorks, are known to be involved with the Tea Partiers as well.

the tea parties were not funded or run by anyone in the early stages.
they were ad hoc things set up by RP supporters in intarweb forums.  i don't know when they became coopted, but i can tell you that for sure...

Then they didn't start out as a product.  They became one when they crowned Hannity on their first attempt at large scale action...ie, when most people heard of them.

[Cain]

The Tea Parties were funded and run, at least in the early stages, by FreedomWorks, a conservative non-profit organization who specialize in astroturfing.  Several other groups associated with the incredibly rich and incredibly conservative Koch brothers, who also fund FreedomWorks, are known to be involved with the Tea Partiers as well.

the tea parties were not funded or run by anyone in the early stages.
they were ad hoc things set up by RP supporters in intarweb forums.  i don't know when they became coopted, but i can tell you that for sure...

The earliest Tea Party sites and blogs were set up by the Sam Adams Alliance, a very well funded libertarian organization with links to the Koch family.  Facebook based groups were set up by individuals linked to various rightwing PR firms (or by people who didn't actually exist) and all carried suspiciously similar writing styles.  Some "small" "grassroot" groups like Right.org were able to offer cash prizes in the tens of thousands for their anti-bailout video competition. 

Brendan Steinhauser is the point-man at FreedomWorks, who got the idea for the Tea Parties from Michelle Malkin's blog, in the fall of 2008, and farmed out the grunt work to web designers and activists picked up from the libertarian fringe, including - yes - Ron Paul supporters.  Eric Odom, who is also linked to FreedomWorks and the Koch Family, plays a similar role. 

[Cramulus]

what do you think - engineering dissent and framing it as an organic grassroots outrage:

tyranny? or good marketing?

[Elder Iptuous]

So is my department's money.  If I don't spend it unnecessarily, though, it can be used for other things, or simply added back to the bottom line.

True.   i agree that it should be added back to the bottom line. but that doesn't happen.  it all gets fucking spent.  and that's why RP votes against those bills...

Or you could just, you know, budget for spending bills already passed, instead of piling up the filthy lucre and having everyone just dig the fuck in.  No new rules would be required to do this, but I don't see Rep Paul clamoring for it.

My budget is built on what maintenance expenditures and projects can be foreseen from previous data.  I don't just get a fucking pile of cash every month, and then sit around and think of ways to spend it.  If I can do it, congress can.  But nobody even tries...including Representative Ron Paul.  Mouthing platitudes about taxation won't cut it.

Why do you say that he doesn't try to fight against the budget?  He votes against the budget bills every time.  he spends his time up at the podium railing against it...  

Earmarks are red herrings unless there are assholes holding up the works in legislation for DAYS because they wan't kickbacks--I'm sorry--EARMARKS put into the bill.

Totally true.
i certainly won't argue that earmarks aren't being used for corrupt purposes. when i said they were a red herring, i was referring specifically to the criticisms leveled against RP....

[Template]

Have you considered the possibility that Ron Paul's just playacting?  There's no risk in voting against something that's going to pass (eventually...).

[Doktor Howl]

what do you think - engineering dissent and framing it as an organic grassroots outrage:

tyranny? or good marketing?

"Freikorps".

[Doktor Howl]

So is my department's money.  If I don't spend it unnecessarily, though, it can be used for other things, or simply added back to the bottom line.

True.   i agree that it should be added back to the bottom line. but that doesn't happen.  it all gets fucking spent.  and that's why RP votes against those bills...

But still takes the money.  He puts on a good act for the rubes, though.

Why do you say that he doesn't try to fight against the budget?  He votes against the budget bills every time.  he spends his time up at the podium railing against it...  

And he still takes the money.

i certainly won't argue that earmarks aren't being used for corrupt purposes. when i said they were a red herring, i was referring specifically to the criticisms leveled against RP....

And we can't have that.  It's different when "Dr Paul" does it.

[Elder Iptuous]

The earliest Tea Party sites and blogs were set up by the Sam Adams Alliance, a very well funded libertarian organization with links to the Koch family.  Facebook based groups were set up by individuals linked to various rightwing PR firms (or by people who didn't actually exist) and all carried suspiciously similar writing styles.  Some "small" "grassroot" groups like Right.org were able to offer cash prizes in the tens of thousands for their anti-bailout video competition. 

Brendan Steinhauser is the point-man at FreedomWorks, who got the idea for the Tea Parties from Michelle Malkin's blog, in the fall of 2008, and farmed out the grunt work to web designers and activists picked up from the libertarian fringe, including - yes - Ron Paul supporters.  Eric Odom, who is also linked to FreedomWorks and the Koch Family, plays a similar role. 

Interesting information.
i'll have to dig into that and get up to steam with what the tea party is now....
I was referencing this as the earliest that i can remember:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/73588
it was sponsored by some group called the Committees of Safety.org   are they a FreedomWorks group?

Have you considered the possibility that Ron Paul's just playacting?  There's no risk in voting against something that's going to pass (eventually...).

yeah.
could be...
some have claimed that he is just playin' and is put in there by the machine specifically as a blow off valve for malcontents to safely bleed off steam rather than vote from the rooftops.  others have suggested that he is genuine, but is allowed to continue as he fills this function.
others think that he should be supported as his actions are preferable, regardless of his intent.  I count myself among the latter, but no longer hold any delusions that it will actually amount to anything.
I'm counting on a breakdown of the system as it devours itself.  probably a slow and grinding one.
i think it's going to suck.