i have some friends who are bernie supporters, and these people have become completely insufferable. Endless conspiracy theories. Repeating old teaparty nonsense about the clintons. Delusional. ranting. assholes.

these bernie people are worse than those teaparty idiots.

Your video, TeaParty Congressman Blames Park Ranger for Shutdown, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

The authority for warrentless wiretapping was given by Bush, by an executive order ,TWELVE YEARS AGO,,before Obama was even in the senate. The patriot act was signed by Bush 41 days after 9/11. Obama wasnt even in the senate then. That the nsa had access to phone and email servers was known, at least 7 years ago,, and many, many, media outlets reported it. Why does everyone suddenly care now??! Oh,,because fox news got upset, now all the teaparty idiots suddenly caught up with the rest of the fucking world....welcome.

>> ^packo:
because things like religion, abortion, immigration... while important to people, aren't important to politicians who use them as "look over here, don't look there" tactics...
they don't want you to focus on how they are blatantly working against the average American citizen's economic interest for their corporate and financial masters
they want you to fight over issues they themselves deem unimportant while feigning concern
they'll use semantics to confuse issues rather than take action
they'll wrap themselves in the flag, all the while ushering in fascism for their own short term social/economic benefit
these people aren't patriots, they are committing treason, and should be hounded through the streets until they can no longer run due to exhaustion; then made public examples of
public servants? the only people they are servicing are themselves
these aren't the departments of this or that I'm talking about... I'm talking directly about the people elected by the citizenry to represent them
they're selling your future, and the future of your children... for the right to suckle at the tit of your new corporate and banking masters


I agree with a lot of what you're saying here but you also make a lot of common mistakes.

first of all, the "important issues" that "matter to people" that powerful people cloak themselves in. Things like abortion, gun control, illegal immigration, terrorism...are wholey fabricated by those same politicians. They're not just using these issues to disctract you, they're creating these issues and convincing you that you care about them to polarize you against fellow Americans. Obama's gonna "tik ur guuuuns" right? Because liberals don't like guns? Bullshit. Of course there are liberals that don't believe in guns, but liberals on the whole split about evenly with the rest of America on the issue. It's a fabricated issue.

Why aren't teapartiers supportingthe OWS movement? Isn't the movement founded on the same frustration that got all those conservatives to load up on the Fox news busses? Oh wait! It's because OWS is against Wallstreet and Teapartiers are against Government! Bullshit. The citizens of America, in the course of serving their own corporate masters have been manipulated once again.

You give politicians too much credit. There is not vast conspiracy to sell out to corporations. Politicians are merely narcisists who are taken by the delusion that their own ideas are important enough to matter to the country. or their narcisists who believe they're own unique personal attributes make them qualified to lead other people. They're not driven a plan to sell out to corporations, they're driven by massive egos. And this is what makes them susecptible to corporations. Big money finds ytheir flaws and draws them out. Politicians succumb to whatever weekness drives them, money, power, sex altruism...big money can give you anything you want.

This is not a problem with liberalism, conservatism, politicians, corporations...this is an issue of human nature. How do you fix that?

If you figure out a way, please let the rest of us know. In the mean time, stop getting sucked into the argument that your corporate masters have duped you into. They know what drives you, they know your weaknesses...and they're playing you against your fellow americans the same way they play politicians against themselves.

I'm sorry no where in my message do I say "i don't understand analogies" you just intentionally miss-quoted me.

I said I understand your attempt at an analogy between "99%" and the "Tea Party" of 1773. But this isn't between those two. It is between "99%" and Today's "Tea Party".

I'm sorry, you sounded coherent at first but I am no longer interested in talking to you. Get over you since of denial that in this case, this one case, you might be wrong. That doesn't mean everything the Democratic party has ever done is wrong. I'm just arguing with this case.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

>> ^ptrcklgrs:
I don't understand analogies.
>> ^hpqp:
EPIC TEAPARTY BURN.
>> ^Ryjkyj:

And one last thing: Who do you think was responsible for cleaning up Boston Harbor in 1773?

>> ^ptrcklgrs:
Special cleaning crews are being brought in to clean up after the trash messes left all over by the "99%" costing the city $$$.


There are no stupid questions. Only stupid answers.

>> ^ptrcklgrs:

I don't understand analogies.
>> ^hpqp:
EPIC TEAPARTY BURN.
>> ^Ryjkyj:

And one last thing: Who do you think was responsible for cleaning up Boston Harbor in 1773?

>> ^ptrcklgrs:
Special cleaning crews are being brought in to clean up after the trash messes left all over by the "99%" costing the city $$$.



There are no stupid questions. Only stupid answers.

You (Or should I say Jon Stewart) trying to be funny by making a stupid reference to the 1773 Boston tea party, in a 2008-2011 Boston Tea Party VS "99%", is well, in a word stupid.

Yes Bush did bail out Wall Street. Which I didn't agree with. However He is no longer in office, and I'm sick of all these people blaming others. Under Obama:

Patriot Act was EXTENDED and added to.
NASSA was shut down.
He has run up a higher debt then Bush did.
Got us in another war.

Bush was not my favorite. But fuck wake up Obama. At least Bush was up front with his "crusade". Obama promised all these things and delivered the exact opposite. I mean come on, If I voted for him, I would be sooooo fucking furious at him.

Fun Fact: Bush is more loved in Africa then Obama. Bush created the largest oceanic preserve. Look into it.

>> ^hpqp:

EPIC TEAPARTY BURN.
>> ^Ryjkyj:

And one last thing: Who do you think was responsible for cleaning up Boston Harbor in 1773?

>> ^ptrcklgrs:
Special cleaning crews are being brought in to clean up after the trash messes left all over by the "99%" costing the city $$$.

EPIC TEAPARTY BURN.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

And one last thing: Who do you think was responsible for cleaning up Boston Harbor in 1773?

>> ^ptrcklgrs:
Special cleaning crews are being brought in to clean up after the trash messes left all over by the "99%" costing the city $$$.

looks like they haven't sold yet: teaparty.com

Corporations don't need government to exist. They are autonomous. They have their own media and their own armies. Internationally speaking, the weaker the government, the more power corporations wield over them. Government, however weak and corruptible it may be, is the only body with the potential to check corporate power. This is why corporations hate government so much and give so much money to the anti government think tanks that you hold so dear.

Less government power = More corporate power.

Why do you think they want a government so small you can drown it in a bathtub?

Government is like a car. It's neutral until someone turns the key. It can take you to work, or on vacation or ram a bus full of school children off a cliff. It all depends on who is driving. Right now, the corporate-sponsored, anti-government teapartiers are in control.

>> ^silvercord:

Two things. MSNBC is just as much in the tank for the lib/prog/soc folks as FOX is for the conserv/rt wing/teaparty people.

Depends on when you tune in. If you watch during the daytime, it's pretty much right-wing or false equivalency central. In the evenings you have a solid block of people who're all openly left in varying degrees.

There's no time I could tune in Fox and hear anything other than far-right lunacy.

>> ^silvercord:
Second, I used to think that part of the journalistic effort was to discover the truth about every corruption. Alas, I was wrong. Today's journalism is about pointing out the corruption of the people you disagree with while turning a blind eye toward those you do. It doesn't really matter which hypocritical side you are on any longer; the train is going over the cliff.


The way I see the state of play, you have the right fabricating corruption and blaming everything bad in the world on the left (whether they had even the remotest control over it or not), while the left points out true corruption on both the left and the right.

The left says that we're stuck with two parties, one whose policies are far too heavily influenced by big business, and the other whose policies are indistinguishable from those of big business.

The right mostly cheers the defeat of things like the DISCLOSE act, and having the SCOTUS strike down essentially all campaign finance reforms.

WTF is up with that?

>> ^NetRunner:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://silvercord.videosift.com" title="member since April 14th, 2006" class="profilelink"><strong style="color: rgb(138, 43, 226);">silvercord, you know that the actual clip they cut to after Rachel saying "sometimes they just have the fundraisers on the air" was actually Glenn Beck literally saying to Bachman "what can I do to help you raise money?", and that was in the center of a long list of people working at Fox who also were headlining Republican fundraisers and making a on-air political candidate endorsements, right?
FWIW, I think Maddow's proclamation at the end about how Keith's suspension is proof that they're not political rings pretty hollow too. The rule that Keith broke was that he didn't ask for permission to donate first, not that there's a hard and fast rule about donations.
But I think she's got a point about there being a qualitative difference between personally donating to candidates, and making explicit, on-air endorsements of candidates and headlining fundraisers for political campaigns.


Two things. MSNBC is just as much in the tank for the lib/prog/soc folks as FOX is for the conserv/rt wing/teaparty people. Second, I used to think that part of the journalistic effort was to discover the truth about every corruption. Alas, I was wrong. Today's journalism is about pointing out the corruption of the people you disagree with while turning a blind eye toward those you do. It doesn't really matter which hypocritical side you are on any longer; the train is going over the cliff.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Sigh - typical MSN hack job. The Tea Party guys saying "seperation of church & state" is not in the constitution are absolutely correct, especially in relationship to how left-wing douchebags like the YTs perceive the issue. Cenk is an idiot. The 1st Ammendment is there to prevent the Federal government from establishing a state religion. At the time of drafting, the individual states had official STATE religions, and the states were worried that the establishment of a federal government would create a national religion (which they were against). To the Founders, the 1st Ammendment was a simple limitation put on the FEDERAL government to stop it from making a law establishing a state religion, and also to stop it from passing ANY law that limits the people's right to exercise whatever religion they had in any way they see fit. The problem here is that the far left's interpretaion of the 1st Ammendment in regards to religion is very different than that, and they keep trying to convince other stupid far left fools that their idiot vision is the one the founders had.


That's contrary to basically every supreme court precedent on the subject in the last 230 years. Your same bullshit argument could be used to say that the 1st amendment protects free speech only from acts of the FEDERAL congress, not from the states.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

I think the general demeanor of VS is that its denizens are "well informed" in the sense that they carefully follow the far-left blogosphere's opinions as doled out by HuffPo, Kos, et al. I am pleased to introduce actual facts and history to an audience with a rigid and limited mindset.

You continue to prove with your own words who possesses a rigid and limited mindset.