On Mon, 03 Jul 2023 00:26:13 -0700, RichA wrote:

> PBS did a documentary on the Tea Party and one prominent feature was their desire to make the bankers and politicians who bailed them out pay for 2008. And shockingly, PBS didn't use their usual skewed leftist slant on the story. Another show, guy makes the observation that only one man ever went to jail over the $40 trillion disaster and that was a horrible miscarriage of justice.

That was the position of the Tea Party? That's a far better
image of them than the image that PBS promoted about the Tea Party
when it was active.

"PBS, where there's never a disagreement with the mainstream media".

In article <0001HW.2A540AF700D588B5306E0138F@news.giganews.com>,
Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jul 2023 00:26:13 -0700, RichA wrote:
>
> > PBS did a documentary on the Tea Party and one prominent feature was their
> > desire to make the bankers and politicians who bailed them out pay for
> > 2008. And shockingly, PBS didn't use their usual skewed leftist slant on
> > the story. Another show, guy makes the observation that only one man ever
> > went to jail over the $40 trillion disaster and that was a horrible
> > miscarriage of justice.
>
> That was the position of the Tea Party? That's a far better
> image of them than the image that PBS promoted about the Tea Party
> when it was active.
>
> "PBS, where there's never a disagreement with the mainstream media".

The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
Orwellian.

These days Republicans are happy to just play bad cop and taking their
chances on the unrepresentative Electoral College and corrupt Supreme
Court bailing them out (which they usually do).

super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
>>. . .

>The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
>"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
>a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
>Orwellian.

That's a big lie. The Tea Party Movement was used later by the Koch
brothers, but those who were there at the beginning truly believed in
the message. There may have been strategists involved in very early days
but that's not something I've read. Nevertheless, the strategists would
have helped getting the message out and finding believers. Numerous
people shared those beliefs; there was nothing fake about it at all.

You don't get to desparage what other people believe. It's not out of
the mainstream to believe that government is unwieldly and has a
negative influence on society given its shear size.

>These days Republicans are happy to just play bad cop and taking their
>chances on the unrepresentative Electoral College and corrupt Supreme
>Court bailing them out (which they usually do).

The Electoral College is literally elected. In nearly all states, it's
by the largest plurality, which then wins all electors. It doesn't
represent the second or third ranked minorities in each state, but it
certainly could.

In article <u81hu7$58qt$1@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
> >The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
> >"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
> >a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
> >Orwellian.
>
> That's a big lie. The Tea Party Movement was used later by the Koch
> brothers, but those who were there at the beginning truly believed in
> the message. There may have been strategists involved in very early days
> but that's not something I've read. Nevertheless, the strategists would
> have helped getting the message out and finding believers. Numerous
> people shared those beliefs; there was nothing fake about it at all.

Well, you simply don't know what you're talking about, O Soul of
Veracity. The center of the movement was former Republican House
Majority Leader and recently-retired lobbyist extraordinaire, Rep. Dick
Armey of Texas.

> The Electoral College is literally elected. In nearly all states, it's
> by the largest plurality, which then wins all electors. It doesn't
> represent the second or third ranked minorities in each state, but it
> certainly could.

Say all you want to attempt to defend it but you'll never get past "1
person doesn't = 1 vote" as long as it's in place.

You could be fine with that though. Most Republicans are because it
gives them a huge advantage in presidential races and achieving
majorities in the Senate.

super70s@super70s.invalid wrote:
> Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Jul 2023 00:26:13 -0700, RichA wrote:

>>> PBS did a documentary on the Tea Party and one prominent feature was
>>> their desire to make the bankers and politicians who bailed them out pay
>>> for 2008. And shockingly, PBS didn't use their usual skewed leftist slant
>>> on the story. Another show, guy makes the observation that only one man
>>> ever went to jail over the $40 trillion disaster and that was a horrible
>>> miscarriage of justice.
>>
>> That was the position of the Tea Party? That's a far better
>> image of them than the image that PBS promoted about the Tea Party
>> when it was active.
>>
>> "PBS, where there's never a disagreement with the mainstream media".

Why hasn't PBS and its related media outlets been defunded yet?

>The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
>"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists.

TROLL-O-METER
5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity

super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:

>>>The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
>>>"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
>>>a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
>>>Orwellian.
>>That's a big lie. The Tea Party Movement was used later by the Koch
>>brothers, but those who were there at the beginning truly believed in
>>the message. There may have been strategists involved in very early days
>>but that's not something I've read. Nevertheless, the strategists would
>>have helped getting the message out and finding believers. Numerous
>>people shared those beliefs; there was nothing fake about it at all.

>Well, you simply don't know what you're talking about, O Soul of
>Veracity. The center of the movement was former Republican House
>Majority Leader and recently-retired lobbyist extraordinaire, Rep. Dick
>Armey of Texas.

Don't forget economist Matt Kibbe and Sen. Jim DeMint, the other insiders.

Armey DID NOT start the movement. This article better reflects my memory
of events.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tea-Party-movement#ref1299351

But the people who were there in early days were expressing their
sincerely held beliefs. You don't get to desparage them for that.

>>The Electoral College is literally elected. In nearly all states, it's
>>by the largest plurality, which then wins all electors. It doesn't
>>represent the second or third ranked minorities in each state, but it
>>certainly could.

>Say all you want to attempt to defend it

I'm not defending the electoral college. I'm calling you a liar.

>but you'll never get past "1 person doesn't = 1 vote" as long as it's
>in place.

That's another lie. If you take your fingers out of your ears and close
your mouth, I'm pointing out that there is nothing in the Constitution
proscribing the method by which Electors are chosen. It's left to the
states. The states could chose to make their state competitive by
awarding presidential electors to the second- and third-tier minorities
in their state if the minority is large enough, and not just the
first-tier minority or majority in winner-take-all.

It doesn't have to be one man one vote, which would require a
constitutional amendment, to be reformed.

>You could be fine with that though.

No, I've stated repeatedly the reform that I want. I want every state in
play in a presidential election. As long as a presidential candidate
believes there is even a single elector to be won in a particular state,
he will campaign there.

You're just playing straw-man games because your ability to argue is
practically nonexistent.

>Most Republicans are because it gives them a huge advantage
>in presidential races

Barak Obama won two elections. Joe Biden has won one. Hillary could have
won but acted entitled and failed to turn out the vote in two key states
she might have won.

Furthermore, Democrats used to regularly win rural constituencies while
Republicans used to regularly win suburban voters. The Democrats stopped
trying to be competitive among rural voters, which is why they cannot
win statewide elections in certain states. Nothing to do with the
Electoral College.

>and achieving majorities in the Senate.

What the fuck does how electors are chosen have to do with the Senate?

Originally, Senators represented states. They've been popularly elected
for a century.

On Jul 5, 2023 at 4:09:41 AM PDT, "super70s" <super70s@super70s.invalid>
wrote:

> In article <u81hu7$58qt$1@dont-email.me>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
>> >The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
>> >"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
>> >a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
>> >Orwellian.
>>
>> That's a big lie. The Tea Party Movement was used later by the Koch
>> brothers, but those who were there at the beginning truly believed in
>> the message. There may have been strategists involved in very early days
>> but that's not something I've read. Nevertheless, the strategists would
>> have helped getting the message out and finding believers. Numerous
>> people shared those beliefs; there was nothing fake about it at all.
>
> Well, you simply don't know what you're talking about, O Soul of
> Veracity. The center of the movement was former Republican House
> Majority Leader and recently-retired lobbyist extraordinaire, Rep. Dick
> Armey of Texas.
>
>> The Electoral College is literally elected. In nearly all states, it's
>> by the largest plurality, which then wins all electors. It doesn't
>> represent the second or third ranked minorities in each state, but it
>> certainly could.
>
> Say all you want to attempt to defend it but you'll never get past "1
> person doesn't = 1 vote" as long as it's in place.

Well, it's not like Democrats are big fans of "1 person, one vote", what with
all the cumulative voting and limited voting schemes they've proposed,
designed to give the votes of bipocs greater weight than whites.

And then there was Obama's DOJ, which outright stated they wanted to change
the system to give people in "marginalized communities" more than one vote in
elections to counter white votes.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

> You could be fine with that though. Most Republicans are because it
> gives them a huge advantage in presidential races and achieving
> majorities in the Senate.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>Jul 5, 2023 at 4:09:41 AM PDT, "super70s" <super70s@super70s.invalid>:
>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:

>>>>The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
>>>>"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
>>>>a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
>>>>Orwellian.

>>>That's a big lie. The Tea Party Movement was used later by the Koch
>>>brothers, but those who were there at the beginning truly believed in
>>>the message. There may have been strategists involved in very early days
>>>but that's not something I've read. Nevertheless, the strategists would
>>>have helped getting the message out and finding believers. Numerous
>>>people shared those beliefs; there was nothing fake about it at all.

>>Well, you simply don't know what you're talking about, O Soul of
>>Veracity. The center of the movement was former Republican House
>>Majority Leader and recently-retired lobbyist extraordinaire, Rep. Dick
>>Armey of Texas.

>>>The Electoral College is literally elected. In nearly all states, it's
>>>by the largest plurality, which then wins all electors. It doesn't
>>>represent the second or third ranked minorities in each state, but it
>>>certainly could.

>>Say all you want to attempt to defend it but you'll never get past "1
>>person doesn't = 1 vote" as long as it's in place.

>Well, it's not like Democrats are big fans of "1 person, one vote", what with
>all the cumulative voting and limited voting schemes they've proposed,
>designed to give the votes of bipocs greater weight than whites.

You're wrong here. Cumulative voting was a voting reform. My state
had cumulative voting thanks to the reform Constitution of 1870. Three
members were elected from each House district. Republicans could elect
a member from Democratic districts, and Democrats could elect a member
from Republican districts.

We got a "reform" constitutional amendment to the new 1970 constitution
that cut back the House by 1/3 and cut each Senate district in half to
make a single-member House district.

Mike Madigan then became Speaker of the House for close to 4 decades.
There went reform.

>And then there was Obama's DOJ, which outright stated they wanted to change
>the system to give people in "marginalized communities" more than one vote in
>elections to counter white votes.

>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

I'm getting an error.

>>. . .

On 7/5/23 2:34 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Jul 5, 2023 at 4:09:41 AM PDT, "super70s" <super70s@super70s.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <u81hu7$58qt$1@dont-email.me>,
>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
>>> >The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
>>> >"AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists. So their name,
>>> >a reference to legitimate historical protesters of real tyranny, was
>>> >Orwellian.
>>>
>>> That's a big lie. The Tea Party Movement was used later by the Koch
>>> brothers, but those who were there at the beginning truly believed in
>>> the message. There may have been strategists involved in very early days
>>> but that's not something I've read. Nevertheless, the strategists would
>>> have helped getting the message out and finding believers. Numerous
>>> people shared those beliefs; there was nothing fake about it at all.
>>
>> Well, you simply don't know what you're talking about, O Soul of
>> Veracity. The center of the movement was former Republican House
>> Majority Leader and recently-retired lobbyist extraordinaire, Rep. Dick
>> Armey of Texas.
>>
>>> The Electoral College is literally elected. In nearly all states, it's
>>> by the largest plurality, which then wins all electors. It doesn't
>>> represent the second or third ranked minorities in each state, but it
>>> certainly could.
>>
>> Say all you want to attempt to defend it but you'll never get past "1
>> person doesn't = 1 vote" as long as it's in place.
>
> Well, it's not like Democrats are big fans of "1 person, one vote", what with
> all the cumulative voting and limited voting schemes they've proposed,
> designed to give the votes of bipocs greater weight than whites.
>
> And then there was Obama's DOJ, which outright stated they wanted to change
> the system to give people in "marginalized communities" more than one vote in
> elections to counter white votes.
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election
>
>> You could be fine with that though. Most Republicans are because it
>> gives them a huge advantage in presidential races and achieving
>> majorities in the Senate.
>
>
>

"Hmmm... the page you're looking for isn't here. "

Stick to Dropbox, genius.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On Wed, 05 Jul 2023 01:30:46 -0700, Ubiquitous wrote:

> super70s@super70s.invalid wrote:
> > Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 03 Jul 2023 00:26:13 -0700, RichA wrote:
>
> > > > PBS did a documentary on the Tea Party and one prominent feature was
> > > > their desire to make the bankers and politicians who bailed them out pay
> > > > for 2008. And shockingly, PBS didn't use their usual skewed leftist slant
> > > > on the story. Another show, guy makes the observation that only one man
> > > > ever went to jail over the $40 trillion disaster and that was a horrible
> > > > miscarriage of justice.
> > >
> > > That was the position of the Tea Party? That's a far better
> > > image of them than the image that PBS promoted about the Tea Party
> > > when it was active.
> > >
> > > "PBS, where there's never a disagreement with the mainstream media".
>
> Why hasn't PBS and its related media outlets been defunded yet?

Because PBS is never different than the mainstream media,
it's just another clone of the New York Times, Washington
Post, etc. The media likes it's government funded PBS.

>
> >
> > The Tea Party was Republican good cop/bad cop scam started with
> > "AstroTurf" strategists instead of grassroots activists.

For your newsgroup Follow-up abuse:

UBIQ-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity