Prominent Tea Party leader: Restricting Voting to Property Owners 'Makes Sense'

[Marokai]

Honestly I don't even think they understand what they say anymore. They seem to not even base their ideas on anything even remotely sensible anymore. Everything that comes out of a tea party or Republican mouth (not that there's much of a difference anymore) seems like it was conceived during a brainstorm session of what would get the most sensationalist headlines and what would irritated the other side the most. It's a juvenile form of policy brainstorming but it doesn't actually seem to be hurting them as much as it should be. (Indeed, it seems to help more than it hurts.)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Well the end goal among these tea party types is to get rid of democracy completely, though I suspect it will be easier to just impoverish Americans to the point that they lose all faith in the democratic system than to actually take away their voting rights.

Maybe this guy should negotiate with Obama. Obama will probably agree to end democracy completely twice.

[Secretary Polnut]

Well the end goal among these tea party types is to get rid of democracy completely, though I suspect it will be easier to just impoverish Americans to the point that they lose all faith in the democratic system than to actually take away their voting rights.

Maybe this guy should negotiate with Obama. Obama will probably agree to end democracy completely twice.

Come on... hyperbole much.

[Smash255]

And you have to love how something that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin turns into a Palin bash-fest...again...

Palin has very closely aligned herself with the tea party, might be a bit unfair to lump her in for this instance, but she has been a strong supporter of Tea Party Nation, and this is one of their leaders making some utterly repugnant comments.

Btw, Phil, are you going to condemn these remarks made by one of the heads of the Tea Party movement or continue to make excuses for the crazy?

[Frink]

Well the end goal among these tea party types is to get rid of democracy completely, though I suspect it will be easier to just impoverish Americans to the point that they lose all faith in the democratic system than to actually take away their voting rights.

Maybe this guy should negotiate with Obama. Obama will probably agree to end democracy completely twice.

Come on... hyperbole much.

Funny hyperbole though. Much better than making excuses for Obama at this point..

[Torie]

I wonder what it would cost to audit everyone's net worth, and whether the subjects of the Klieg lights (i.e., all of us) would mind being so audited. Just a thought.

[Secretary Polnut]

Well the end goal among these tea party types is to get rid of democracy completely, though I suspect it will be easier to just impoverish Americans to the point that they lose all faith in the democratic system than to actually take away their voting rights.

Maybe this guy should negotiate with Obama. Obama will probably agree to end democracy completely twice.

Come on... hyperbole much.

Funny hyperbole though. Much better than making excuses for Obama at this point..

Fair point lol

[Brandon H]

If it were "restricting voting on property taxes to property owners makes sense" I would agree with it. (Of course this is more at the local level than federal level of congress.)

[Joe Republic]

And you have to love how something that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin turns into a Palin bash-fest...again...

Palin has very closely aligned herself with the tea party, might be a bit unfair to lump her in for this instance, but she has been a strong supporter of Tea Party Nation, and this is one of their leaders making some utterly repugnant comments.

It wasn't my intention to lump Palin in with this specific issue.  "Palin-American" is another pejorative for teabaggers that I rather like.

[Keystone Phil]

And you have to love how something that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin turns into a Palin bash-fest...again...

Palin has very closely aligned herself with the tea party, might be a bit unfair to lump her in for this instance, but she has been a strong supporter of Tea Party Nation, and this is one of their leaders making some utterly repugnant comments.

No, it's totally unfair because she has nothing to do with this.

I don't get it: are we bashing Palin because she's "oh just so darn folksy" and populist or are we bashing her because she's a pawn of the wealthy elites? Bringing her up here really doesn't make any sense.

Btw, Phil, are you going to condemn these remarks made by one of the heads of the Tea Party movement or continue to make excuses for the crazy?

When did I make a single excuse for these statements?

[Smash255]

And you have to love how something that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin turns into a Palin bash-fest...again...

Palin has very closely aligned herself with the tea party, might be a bit unfair to lump her in for this instance, but she has been a strong supporter of Tea Party Nation, and this is one of their leaders making some utterly repugnant comments.

No, it's totally unfair because she has nothing to do with this.

I don't get it: are we bashing Palin because she's "oh just so darn folksy" and populist or are we bashing her because she's a pawn of the wealthy elites? Bringing her up here really doesn't make any sense.

Btw, Phil, are you going to condemn these remarks made by one of the heads of the Tea Party movement or continue to make excuses for the crazy?

When did I make a single excuse for these statements?

You didn't exactly make an excuse for the comments, but you seem to start arguments in threads about someone on the right saying something stupid or even heinous, but never seem to condemn those comments or admit what they said was wrong or stupid.

So are you going to condemn this crap or not?

[Keystone Phil]

And you have to love how something that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin turns into a Palin bash-fest...again...

Palin has very closely aligned herself with the tea party, might be a bit unfair to lump her in for this instance, but she has been a strong supporter of Tea Party Nation, and this is one of their leaders making some utterly repugnant comments.

No, it's totally unfair because she has nothing to do with this.

I don't get it: are we bashing Palin because she's "oh just so darn folksy" and populist or are we bashing her because she's a pawn of the wealthy elites? Bringing her up here really doesn't make any sense.

Btw, Phil, are you going to condemn these remarks made by one of the heads of the Tea Party movement or continue to make excuses for the crazy?

When did I make a single excuse for these statements?

You didn't exactly make an excuse for the comments, but you seem to start arguments in threads about someone on the right saying something stupid or even heinous, but never seem to condemn those comments or admit what they said was wrong or stupid.

I "start arguments" when there are gross generalizations whether it be about Tea Partiers, Palin fans, etc.

I know many people involved in Tea Party groups and I hate that they are constantly portrayed as dumb, unsophisticated reactionaries. The "teabagger" label is as eye roll worthy as the comments that you flip out over. No one ever apologies for the former though. Don't talk about maturity in the political process and then insist on calling people "teabaggers."

So are you going to condemn this crap or not?

Yes, I strongly condemn such remarks. I know that is what the world has been waiting on.

[opebo]

I wonder what it would cost to audit everyone's net worth, and whether the subjects of the Klieg lights (i.e., all of us) would mind being so audited. Just a thought.

The poor are continuously so audited - if one attempts to gain any government benefits, one must acquiesce to some investigation of ones financial status, work search 'efforts', etc. 

And of course everyone is continuously under audit by 'private' business in the from of credit histories, etc.

Let's try to be realistic here, people - we live in a exploitative, hierarchical society, so lets try to ameliorate it, eh?  Does it really have to be Tea Party on one side and Pol Pot on the other?  Because that freedom fighter had a very simplified form of audit for the privileged.

[Vasall des Midas]

...and for his own supporters. Especially for those, actually - Tuol Sleng was a prison for "traitors".

[patrick1]

It certainly does make sense. Those who actually have a stake in a community should be the ones deciding what happens there.

Surprise, surprise.

I encourage you to read patrick1 and PiT's posts in this thread to see the flaw in that line of thinking.

Slumlords are not representative of true property owners and shouldn't exist in the first place.

I don't see how the fact that lots of people got screwed by the banksters' controlled demolition of the economy and lost their homes is proof that these people didn't care about their communities.

No true scotsman, huh.  They do exist and have existed for centuries.

The banks complicity in the housing bubble does not absolve the numerous speculators who had their hand in creating the crisis.

The assertion that owning property somehow makes you a shining beacon of the community is absurd. Large and small corporations have owned property and created environmental brownfields. On an individual level ownership does not equal responsibility or a sense of stewardship. A person's sense of community comes from within and not some deed.

[bullmoose88]

If it were "restricting voting on property taxes to property owners makes sense" I would agree with it. (Of course this is more at the local level than federal level of congress.)

But wait, yes...property owners receive the tax bill...but I think its pretty safe to assume that renters pay the property tax through their rent. 

[King]

Slumlords are not representative of true property owners and shouldn't exist in the first place.

So, you would favor government regulation to ban slumlords and absentee ownership?

That's the only way that would happen.  No matter how low housing prices get, there will always be a segment of the population that prefers to rent.

[opebo]

...and for his own supporters. Especially for those, actually - Tuol Sleng was a prison for "traitors".

Sure.  But the point is when push-comes to shove, it doesn't really require an audit to figure out, roughly, who is the exploiter.

[ag]

Ugh, before even approaching the reactionary implications of what he proposes, his whole argument rests on a false premise.  So many property owners could give a crap about their community.  As we saw with the housing bubble, many property owners are motivated by pure profit and greed. Then we could review the long history of slumlords and analyze if they are really interested in their community. This 1950's apple pie, wholesome view of America being put forth by the tea partiers as something to return to is just ridiculous.  

Actually, in capitalism, property owners are the community - non-owners are subhuman, and not fully citizens, and certainly lacking in political power.

do not project your own elitist sociallist views on others ))

[ag]

...and for his own supporters. Especially for those, actually - Tuol Sleng was a prison for "traitors".

Sure.  But the point is when push-comes to shove, it doesn't really require an audit to figure out, roughly, who is the exploiter.

Oh, yeah. But, keep in mind, that even without an audit, the revolutionary justice will have no doubt that you are also one of us ))

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

I'm watching Red Eye right now, and as I'm thinking about it, it'd be an even more terrible idea in today's age, not only because of the principle, but it would also restrict vast amounts of people in big cities (such as New York) where people rent apartments due to lack of space for houses.

[LBJ Revivalist]

I'm watching Red Eye right now, and as I'm thinking about it, it'd be an even more terrible idea in today's age, not only because of the principle, but it would also restrict vast amounts of people in big cities (such as New York) where people rent apartments due to lack of space for houses.

That's the idea.
After all, they aren't the "Real America" anyway.
Don't worry though, you Tea Party people ain't seen what's coming yet You guys aren't taking us back to 1800.
You betcha!