I typed in Tea Party Origin Fox News to Google and immediately got the same mediamatters cite GIGObuster got -which confirms my memory. Sponsored is in the sense of sponsoring an immigrant, not buying ads.
Reporting about something is a lot different from encouraging people to attend. Favorable coverage is not sponsoring either, but Fox went well beyond that, as the cite said.
Your admission that you can’t refute the point is accepted.
Considering that Washington eliminated the regulations that controlled the banks, and that Washington turned a blind eye to the bubble since it was politically convenient to have demand up and pay stagnant, the people are correct. The implication seems to be that the people blame Obama for the 2007 meltdown. That’s as funny as calling me a kid, which hasn’t happened in about 35 years.
The thing is that TPers and Pwogs overlap on lots of issues but their programming prevents them from even thinking about joining forces. My favorite when talking to righties is that they are pissed off at elites ruining the country. Who are the elites? Politicians? OK, who else? College professors? Hollywood studios? Really, that’s where things went wrong? The closest they ever come is criticizing a guy like Soros.
Not really, no. They’re fairly disorganized and don’t seem to have a truly cogent agenda. if you have to dig to find out exactly what they want then they are doing it wrong, not me.
Well it’s a very complex issue which is why groups like these protestors don’t offer anything more than news at ten coverage. Lots of blame to go around and much of that blame starts with each and every one of us. For over loading on debt, for spending recklessly. It lays with politicians who demanded credit for all (even for those who never should have been given significant credit. I see the Democrats at fault here). It includes politicians who allowed large banks to take the new, easy credit laws and make lemonade with them (Republicans clearly to blame here for not even pretending to provide any oversight).
I do know this though, from what I can tell, the protestors “fix its” wont fix anything and we’re likely looking at an Obama Presidency in 2012 with a Republican Congress. Higher taxes but with some spending control. Find a way to minimize the pain from the housing bubble and I see the economy turning around nicely.
:dubious: But, I don’t have to dig to find that out. And neither do you.
Not everyone amassed debt. Lots of people bought houses that they could afford, and now see themselves under water and unable to move or refinance. You can’t blame them for not seeing an unprecedented nationwide drop in housing prices, especially when the risk departments of banks didn’t see it either. You might blame a naive, uneducated home buyer who got steered into a worse loan than he could qualify for, or who got a loan any rational bank would reject, but not a lot. You can’t blame the people who are losing their homes because they got laid off due to the side effects of the banks incompetence at all.
Both parties were pushing for more home ownership, which does have all sorts of social benefits. Neither party forced the banks to do liar loans. Many of the worst culprits were not even covered under the laws you are referring to. In any case some of the attorney generals tried to put an end to some of the abuses before the bubble burst, and Greenspan refused to help. Here is a cite.
Sorry, we are not all equally guilty.
I don’t know where you’re getting that context considering:
93% believe that communications like cell phone and internet access be a right and not just reserved for the rich and we should have free internet and cell phone service as a national goal.
Seems like an unbelievable stretch to make that demand sound reasonable. Cell phones are not Skype. National Goals have nothing to do with Egypt.
They need to be reminded that all the really important advances were made by sensible people with modest goals. Tom Paine, for instance.
What I told you was the background, what Forbes is missing, I’m just saying what I have seen coming from a technical background. And many do mention the Arab Spring as one of their inspirations, so it is pertinent to point out why access is important for them.
Goals don’t have to be modest to be sensible.
GIGO: I’m just not getting the connection with Egypt. Sure, they may have inspired by those protests, but so what? Our government isn’t censuring the internet or blocking cell phones. We already have political institutions in place to ensure the free flow of ideas and communication. Free as in “unfettered”, not as in “gratis”. They want the “gratis” part.
Now, there’s nothing per se wrong with having that as a goal, but I see no need to cloak it in some mantel of global oppression.
Whoosh?
And I already referred to that, it is a very old idea, it is like when electricity lines are subsidized for poor locations, a similar plan was IIRC set for phones but for internet access we are way behind compared to other developed nations, as usual it is conservatives who most complain about having to pay more in their bills to give access for the less well to do.
The point is that while the inspiration came from movements elsewhere in the globe, it is the turn of the USA now.
Once upon a time, we were the inspiration.
I know, it’s wearing and wearying, isn’t it? Sometimes I envy the Canadians, who have just as much freedom-and-democracy as we have, but they get to just be a country and there’s little pressure to live up to the Canadian Dream or the Canadian Mission or the Canadian Pageant or whatever. AFAIK.
Such things would be uncanadian, if there was such a thing.
They are not asking for subsidies for the poor. They are asking for it to be free. I mean, seriously, water isn’t free, but they want free cell phones. And they want to be absolved of their college loans.
Like I said, might as well add a pony to the list.
I just posted this link in another thread.
Not sure why you feel their demands are unreasonable.
Or, take MSN’s summary:
What color of pony?
http://mooreslore.corante.com/archives/2005/06/13/even_free_wifi_needs_a_business_model.php
I was not kidding when I told you I knew about efforts to get free connections to all, and they have not only altruistic reasons for that. What it is clear is that there have been efforts from industry (and not just because customers are not ordering enough coffee) to kill any efforts from local governments from offering free connections in the USA, and yet, I have seen that new industries and technologies can come out of things like free wi-fi, so it is not just pie in the sky talk.
As I mentioned, there is a lot that that Forbes article leaves out, although is sympathetic and the point stands that many well to do will ignore the protesters at their own peril, the writer still had to make protesters sound ridiculous thanks to the wording in the survey questions, the writer in the end did not offer explanations to show that those demands are more than just pony talk.
I though we already disposed of the silly idea of grabbing forum posts from users to put them as examples of what **all **the people in a movement agree with, besides, just by looking at the comments, it is clear that many do not agree with the poster.