FOOT SOLDIERS For Corporate "Owner Rights" - Rand Paul Exposes the Real Tea Party-by Robert Parry

[kpete]

Robert Parry refocuses on the central principle of the libertarian/populist Tea Party "movement:"

After the voting-rights comments, some media pundits, like Newsweek’s Howard Fineman, made excuses for Paul, saying he was just a political novice who hadn’t mastered the skill of packaging his answers in politically neutral ways. In other words, his only sin was believing too sincerely in his ideology and expressing it honestly.

However, what Paul was really doing was explaining what the Tea Party movement is truly about. Though it draws from a variety of political animosities – like white resentment of the nation’s demographic changes and a desire to “take our country back” from the likes of President Barack Obama – the Tea Party’s core mission is to stop the federal government from limiting the power of corporations.

That is why former House Republican Leader Dick Armey has thrown his corporate-backed FreedomWorks behind the Tea Party movement. It’s why Massey president Don Blankenship showed up in Stars-and-Stripes apparel to give a rousing speech to a Tea Party rally.

In essence, Big Corporations are pulling a Big Con on the common folks attracted to the Tea Party movement, getting them to focus their anger at Big Government as a threat to their “liberties” when the federal government is all that stands in the way of total corporate dominance of the United States.

So, instead of pressing for a democratized and energized federal government that could serve as a check on unbridled corporate power, the Tea Partiers are being turned into foot soldiers for “owner rights,” to ensure that corporations are freed from government regulations and accountability.

more:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/28970/rand-paul-exposes-the-real-tea-party

[HowHasItComeToThis]

1. THE MEDIA WILL NEVER ADMIT OR REPORT THIS

THEY ARE THE ADVERTIZING ARM

[RandomThoughts]

3. Yes much of the media has an agenda besides information dispersal.

Many are part of groups, some even with signed documents.

Many are good people, but because of the consolidated structure, they worry if they say certain things they would be removed from the group that is part of some in media. And some do not see things from many perspectives.

So they create narratives and concepts to try and maintain certain groups claims and try to maintain some status quo systems that can not be defended.


There is not argument nor claim for the consolidations that do not lead to better ways and less suffering for many people. So the claims are only some lingering defence of some group, because it is the group they are in, not because it makes sense for society, or because society does not matter from the effect of how joining groups breaks empathy.

Many journalist are mostly good people, and from their perspective they may not even see what they do as possibly mostly bad, since their are some bubbles that many people are in that keeps them from seeing other information. There is a mentality in groups to play games and protect smaller groups in a gang like fashion.

When there is scarcity of resources many people will form groups, and those groups can be arbitrary like race of creed, or they can be based on ideology, and what some people think is best based on what helps them most.

Most of group forming starts from hording limited resources, many times caused by systems of scarcity, but they soon lose that and just try to push down anyone not in their group. It is an ideology that thinks in terms of survival of the fittest and control.

It is easy to see. It is also easy to see many that do not have those views, including many in Journalism, many people also try to think if their is a reason why they think one way or another.

[Vinnie From Indy]

2. Bravo!

Parry is one America's real journalists. Howard Fineman is ridiculous fraud that knows completely that his place at the table is only insured by his continued willingness to be a lying piece of shit!

[Bitwit1234]

4. You see sane and sensible real Americans know this

the ones that don't are the ignorant racist members of the tea bags. They don't even have the common sense of a fifth grader.

[Uncle Joe]

5. I believe Robert Parry nailed it.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.:thumbsup:

[alc]

6. don't forget about small corporations

Jobs come from creating small companies, and some small companies becoming medium companies and medium companies becoming big. While we focus on the big companies abusing their workers or customers, A LOT of people work for small companies that are not trying to screw anyone.

It can be a MAJOR pain in the ass to run or even work for a small company and even worse if you're clients are big companies who require all suppliers to follow big company regulations. It really sucks when you're overworked and your boss says "I know you're overworked and we have the money to hire one more employee, but that puts us into a new regulatory category so we need to be able to hire another HR person and put our lawyer on a bigger retainer and have everyone document things better (and be less productive thus negating the new employee's work) so we can't hire another person to do the real work yet." I went through that 3 times with one company that grew from about 15 employees when I started to over 200 employees and it was real, not just the owner trying to squeeze the most work out of us.

Some regulations are important at any level (civil rights, chemical, basic accounting). Lots of others make no sense to the everyday small business employee but they still have to follow them and fill out forms and frequently feel that that government is over-extending it's regulatory authority. Those people are likely to agree with Rand Paul and the Tea Party with respect to regulation in general. And if they've had to deal with the eeoc for baseless complaints on hiring, they are likely to agree with respect to civil rights.

I'm sure someone/everyone will call me racist for saying the complaints were baseless, but I was an interviewer at 2 different 100-person companies where I did not approve of a minority applicant. The applicant didn't have the experience we listed as required and could not answer basic questions. But the applicants complained and it took our HR days to interview us (the interviewers) and collect our previous recommendations and show that not only had each of us interviewers had recommended blacks and women in the past, but the company had hired them and this time we hired someone more qualified. I've also work for 20-30 person companies that received letters from lawyers threatening eeoc action. Nothing came of those once our lawyer showed their lawyer that we employed blacks and women at the same pay/seniority levels as white males, and this applicant was less qualified than the person we hired. Even if you are not a racist it's easy to think the eeoc wastes your time, can drain your small company's resources, and think the government is going to far.