Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Fiz

The new Tea Party movement is a corporate sham and an elaborate PR campaign

35 posts in this topic

I just thought I'd make this in response to Venom's thread. While I'm pretty sure he's just a fakeposter, there's no doubt that there are people that actually believe this sh*t is organic, and that these people are acting in their interests.

Read the full article here. I'm going to post the most intriguing excerpts.

so you believed all this? you were caught up in the fervor? you think something financed by one of the richest men in america is in your, the lowly commoner's interest?

congrats you're a corporate shill

dude youre an idiot. youre so completely blind to reality. who cares who it was financed by, obviously the man is trying to make a real difference, while helping to spread the word against obama, his socialist ideals, and his law-breaking cronies in the cabinet. corporate america/business owners are what keeps this country afloat. without corporate america, the people have no power in this country and the government rules all. why is this so hard to understand?? its common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't try to match me at an intellectual level while trying to insult me at the same time; you're good at neither.

:smilielol5::smilielol5::smilielol5:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW. Murdoch didn't buy WSJ till 07. My link was 03 but thanks for the insight.

im aware of this and if you'd read you'd have picked up on that. i stated

the WSJ is now owned by Rupert Murdoch.

then later identified the article as a line from the WSJ in 2003. I mean....do you think this is a burn?

Soros paid for a journalists to spin something. Pro UN. But whats the biggie on that?

The book is pro-U.N. to the point of ignoring Annan’s documented role in the failure to prevent the 1994 Rwanda genocide.

where in the world does it say he paid a journalist to spin something?

But one journalist who submitted articles for consideration for a prize from UNCA said they were rejected because they were considered too critical of the U.N. He was told they should be “more positive” about the U.N.‘s efforts to fix problems.

so a guy is pissed he didn't win an award and says it's political?

Do you drop Andrew Sullivan?

i'd drop him from a cliff if i had the chance

Did you know Soros had his hand in the McCain-Feingold Act?

IANSA?

do you have a problem with campaign finance or anti-gun violence? he's an outspoken supporter of both of these things. i don't know how you could say he is anything but open about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anti-gun violence?

What is that? And please be gentle oh merciful one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*pops some popcorn..*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we debate/yell/get pissy at each other sans the name calling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I added Andrew Sullivan to fiz's Chomsky.

Can using mythological names calling be grounds for bant? Ie my reference for fiz to avoid staring at the pond too long?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This forum needs an enema

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, i will read the article, i will think about it, then i will respond. if you provide something obviously biased and uninformed (like the ridiculous crap SCP likes to post) then I will point that out.

Glad I can play a part in your little fantasy world. Makes me feel all tingly inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't try to match me at an intellectual level while trying to insult me at the same time; you're good at neither.

Smarty.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites