[Dragaera] Off-Topic Discussion: Occupy Wall Street

[Matthew]

On 12/15/2011 08:05 AM, Mark Landin wrote:
> The Tea Party in the media is the Tea Party that's become the
> mouthpiece or political tool of the ultra-right. I don't think it
> represents the "real" Tea Party as it's founders intended.
I suppose that depends on what the media is telling you.  I mostly tune
out the old media. 

The real idea behind the tea party is simple: we want a balanced budget
without increased taxes.  "TEA" was originally an acronym for "Taxed
Enough Already", and that's the core message.  While most tea party
members are probably social conservatives, that is very definitely not
the issue of the tea party.  Specific secondary issues include Obama's
health care law, which (despite the way that the CBO analysis was gamed)
spends a dramatic amount of money for the foreseeable future and the
government bailouts of various industries. 

I don't see how any of that is "ultra right".  Right-leaning, yes, which
says a few uncomfortable things about the political left, but certainly
within the bounds of reasonable discourse and mainstream opinion.  Do
you disagree?  Or are you attributing some other opinions to the tea
party, that they might not agree are tea party ideas?

I'm actually curious to hear how you got to "ultra right".

As for the occupy wall street folks.  I would think that if they took a
moment to think about things, they would have a few issues in common
with the tea party folks.  If the OWS people support the "99%" against
the "1%", surely they are opposed to bailing out financial institutions
(too many to name) and crony capitalists like GM and Chrysler?  Surely
they object to being taxed in order to give money away to companies like
Solyndra, not because green energy is necessarily a bad thing, but
because those companies were failing, and known to be failing, when they
got the money?  Assuming for the sake of argument that green energy is
worthwhile, shouldn't we avoid bailing out failing companies and focus
on industries that can be successful?

I know why I think the OWS people actually protesting haven't thought
that through, but I'd like to know what people here think.  Isn't there
some common ground to be had here?  Regardless of what we think we
should be spending money on, can't we agree that spending money we don't
have is a bad idea, and spending money to bail out companies with
political connections is corrupt?