|
|||||||||||||
By Punkerslut
Info: Tea Party Nation Homepage Greetings, I would like to know more about your organization, but there's not much available on your website. Approximately 400 words, maybe, to describe your entire political stance. You list a "FAQ" for Conservatives, and "Resources," both of which lead to empty pages, or standardized login-pages -- that is, nobody can look at anything on your site unless they join your organization. That is deceptive. After all, your website is overloaded with ads; anybody who joins up with you is bound to get offers for viagra and penis-pumps in their e-mail. How "Conservative." (I also love the shirt you're selling for women that has "tassles" imprinted over the nipples, with something about "freedom" involved. Ultra-conservative, indeed.) Anyhow, since you only offer a paragraph or two, I'll try to take a stab at whatever substance is available. You're opposed to unions, but you love the governor. If anti-union senators and legislators are remove, then "the efforts of Governor Scott Walker to restore the power of the citizen over the power of the special interest will be reversed." The power of special interest? What is "special interest"? That's like a code word, meaning some big, bad, awful group that's influencing government in a way that the people wouldn't like it to be. You seem to associate unions with this. Well, unions can't get away with murder, but capitalists can. The Coca Cola company has hired assassins to kill and intimidate unionists in Haiti, as recently as a few months ago. (NoSweat.org.uk) So, there's a special interest in government, even dominating charity groups who haven't reported on these human rights violations, and yet -- you call the union the "special interest." Or, at least, you associate the union with special interests. Doesn't this seem like a reverse of the logical conclusion? In 2006, the state of Iowa gave $1.2 billion to Capitalists just to develop industry and break unions. (Farm.EWG.org) Doesn't that seem problematic to you? The US government is openly handing money over to Capitalists for the purpose of breaking up union organizing efforts. That subsidy money funds human resources departments that track union activity, human resource management firms that spy on union activists, etc., etc.. The government gives billions every year to Capitalists, just to break up unions, even allowing them to murder them openly in the streets, and your response? "Obviously the unions are a special influence on the government..." Of course you don't list a reference or even an example for this. Then again, you did limit yourself to exactly seven sentences in describing your entire organization. I don't think you could've made room for a reference or a citation. You describe conservative legislators as having "stood up to the intimidation and threats from the far left and union thugs." Haven't you seen the pictures of machine guns on the roof of Carnegie's factory? Haven't you seen photographs of the dead lying bleed in the street from being bayoneted by state troops? Doesn't it seem like the government is the thug and the union-organizer is the revolutionary? Both political parties, Republicans and Democrats, are wholly funded by private corporations. Both of them pass laws that support the Capitalists and that oppress the worker. Both of them allow legal systems where Corporations can steal billions from the public and face no criminal prosecution, while hungry and homeless children are thrown into prisons for years. And you're going to tell me, that "special interests" means the interests of those poor, hungry children, as opposed to those multi-billion-dollar, international corporations? Yes, of course the hungry have-nots possess government -- and they're using it to give billions to Capitalists under the title of "subsidies" while they starve to death in the streets. Your political ideas are somewhere between completely undeveloped and a fantasy world. Your organization wants "...to help bring fiscal sanity back to the Badger State." But by fiscal sanity, you mean the government should cut funding to social programs for the poor and hungry. You don't mean the government should cut funding to mega-millionaires who take billion in taxes every year just to run their own businesses. Either you are trying to deceive others, or you have successfully deceived yourself. Sincerely,
|
