Spokane7
41°Quick links: Easter photo contest • Washington Legislature • Idaho Legislature • Gonzaga hoops • WSU hoops
Idawa: No, the tea parties seem to be no more than partisan posturing - form without substance.
I’m somewhat surprised by the hyperbole coming from the right fearing gun control and taxes on the average Joe, both of which have not happened under Obama, nor has their been any movement in congress toward such. They are quaking at boogeyman. Were the Dem’s really this bad about Bush, seeing evil in every word and breath? Secondly, I think our forefathers would be a little ashamed. They protested actual oppression - this political stunt is simply a weak form of parody.
Question (from Idawa): Were the Dem’s really this bad about Bush, seeing evil in every word and breath?
D.F. Oliveria is a columnist and blogger for The Spokesman-Review. Huckleberries Online was judged the best 2008 Idaho newspaper blog by the Idaho Press Club. And the best 2007 news blog in the Pacific Northwest by the Society for Professional Journalist. Print Huckleberries is a past winner of the Herb Caen Memorial Column contest by the National Association of Newspaper Columnists. The Readership Institute of Northwestern University cited this blog as a good example of online community journalism.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
RedMan on April 14 at 8:00 a.m.
Yes
Flag as inappropriate
trishgannon on April 14 at 8:24 a.m.
Did democrats see evil in every word and breath of Bush? Yes. Because it was there. ;0) At least, for my part that's the explanation.
Flag as inappropriate
toadman on April 14 at 8:26 a.m.
“Were the Dem’s really this bad about Bush, seeing evil in every word and breath?”
Yes. However, often times (but not all, I'll grant you), there really WAS evil in every word and breath….well, strike that…there was evil in every word and breath when it was Dick Cheney talking, there was DUMB in every word and breath when Bush was talking.
heh….
Show me the oppression. I see none.
Flag as inappropriate
Arch_Druid on April 14 at 8:35 a.m.
I saw where Cal Thomas wanted to exploit those partisan tea parties from a political agenda. But if he wanted to see hypocrisy, he could have first looked in the mirror.
I had just commented at greater length at one of my blogs. Where were the protests over deficit increasing tax cuts that were essentially bail outs for the wealthy… LOL! I agree with Idawa, this is useless and meaningless partisan posturing.
Flag as inappropriate
Phaedrus on April 14 at 8:40 a.m.
These “Tea Parties” aren't really a grassroots activity:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/09/l…
Flag as inappropriate
Cabbage Boy on April 14 at 8:48 a.m.
Funny, I see the Dems being worse about Bush. He was like the anti-president that dominated their sermons.
Toad, you won't see the oppression because you welcome the changes (at least for now.) FOCA is a suppression of state's rights. Taking government control of banks. Now, granted much of the financial tyranny was started under Bush, but Obama sure isn't “Change” in that realm.
Flag as inappropriate
eclafitz on April 14 at 8:54 a.m.
Yes.
Flag as inappropriate
Arch_Druid on April 14 at 8:54 a.m.
Say CB, did you see on the news last night where the banks that Obama plans on taking over are now planning to squeeze you for extra $$$ either on the credit card, ATM or other fees? Yeah, and they got your money for TARP too. CBS Evening News.
Flag as inappropriate
Cabbage Boy on April 14 at 9:05 a.m.
Sorry Arch, I didn't see that. Don't watch much of the pre-packaged news as I was busy reading the Socialist Primer for Kids to help my son with his homework.
But yeah, the banks aren't gonna miss out on a chance to squeeze every last dollar. Our financial world is gonna get rocked. And most people will turn to their almighty savior, the great and benevolent government, to save them.
Flag as inappropriate
toadman on April 14 at 9:07 a.m.
“Toad, you won't see the oppression because you welcome the changes…”
True, very true.
The social changes, the return of science and intellectualism, and lately, the re-opening of Cuba (Obama doesn't quite go far enough for my taste on that last point, but it's a good start).. all give me the warm fuzzies.
;-)
I suppose this is what it feels like to be in the ideological majority. And true, it's been such a long time since we were in the ideological majority, I suppose some of us have forgotten how to act (but I'll stop short of apologizing for my liberal brethren…some are jerks, some aren't…I can't change that.).
When it was the other way, it was pretty darn crappy. I'm sorry you guys (meaning repubs and conservatives in general) are feeling slighted and sad by not being in the ideological majority anymore, but this is how democracy works, right? Right?
Flag as inappropriate
nic on April 14 at 9:50 a.m.
When Dems saw evil in Bush it was because of actions taken… The Cons are seeing evil in Obama because of things that “might” happen… or will happen if their unlikely theories materialize.
Flag as inappropriate
Arpie on April 14 at 10:18 a.m.
In Bush I saw not evil, but gross incompetence.
I think the tea parties are ridiculous. The original tea party was to fight taxation without representation. That is not the case here. The people organizing these tea parties just don't like there representatives. as John Stewart said last week, “It's not tyranny. It's an election. Your guy lost. It's supposed to taste like a s*** taco.”
Flag as inappropriate
Charlie on April 14 at 10:50 a.m.
I recall a few democrats getting down and dirty on GWB on the house and senate floor, on the record. I also remember some republicans getting on WJC's case but not to the way Durban and Conyers did. Tacky.
Flag as inappropriate
Herb Huseland on April 14 at 11:34 a.m.
Political posturing is not unique to either party. What is that old saying? “Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house.”
Flag as inappropriate
cantyoureadthesigns on April 14 at 12:33 p.m.
We seem to have distilled the Boston Tea Party down to the simple plea of no taxation without representation, however it was far more complicated than that. And it wasn't about high taxes, either, as the modern day tea partiers would have you believe.
The East India Tea Company, founded by the Crowne, and in which most members of the British parliament were investors in, became the first multi-national “corporation” in the world, and with the help of the British military, it attempted to control the world market for tea, for which it was quite successful for many decades prior to the American Revolution.
As is usually the case when a government establishes a monopoly corporation to control goods and trade, entrepreneurs, in this case smugglers, find ways of getting around the monopoly law, which is exactly what many American Colonists did. Also, monopoly corporations, often get themselves in trouble eventually, as East India Company did around 1772, when they had amassed a huge stockpile of tea, and needed to unload it somehow, in order to keep from going bankrupt.
So they convinced British legislators to enforce their monopoly control of the tea trade in the American Colonies, they reduced the price and tax to Americans, to a point where they could just undercut the price that the Colonial tea smugglers were able to offer, in order to control the market for tea in America.
Most ports in the US in rejected the East India ships outright, refusing to let them unload, and refusing to pay the tax. The Governor in Massachusetts, a subject of the Crowne after all, decided to try and go with the Crowne's plan, accept the tea, have the tax paid by the selected consignee to the MA government, but this never happened as by now, large crowds were gathering in Boston who most certainly did not want the government to accept the tea. This set the stage for the familiar story we know of the band of Colonists who pitched the tea into the harbor, and act of defiance not only against no taxation without representation, but also revolting against what was then the world's largest corporation and its attempt to have monopoly control in the Colonies.
Flag as inappropriate