The TEA Party Doesn’t Represent Helena

Montanans have a strong candidate in the race to take back the seat held by TEA Party nutjob Liz Bangerter.    

Long-time Helena leader Kelsen Young (pictured) says she’s running for office because she believes “we need more strong, independent and progressive voices at the State Legislature.”  So true.

Bangerter is a Republican first-term legislator campaigning for re-election to Helena’s House District 80.  She was elected to represent a liberal district by pretending to be a moderate. Then, she turned out to be one of the most conservative GOPers out there.   Bangerter voted for Derek Skees’ unconstitutional scheme to create an eleven person panel to nullify federal laws and voted to allow hunting with silencers.   Worse, she actually sponsored the bill to legalize insurance company discrimination against women.

It turns out that Bangerter actually serves on ALEC’s Health and Human Services Task Force.  For those of you not familiar with ALEC, here’s the deal.  Through ALEC, behind closed doors, corporations hand state legislators like Bangerter exact changes to the law they want passed.

What kind of bills?  Often these are changes to the laws that will make the corporations more money.  They are also often bills that the GOP will introduce only to attack Democrats in the next election, based on their votes.  The pre-drafted ALEC bills are all wrapped up with neat little talking points and press releases so the legislator doesn’t actually need any brain cells.

Besides legislators like Bangerter, only corporations have full membership standing in ALEC. Corporations sit on all ALEC task forces–like the one Bangerter is on.  The corporations vote with legislators to approve “model” bills–the only difference is that the corporations get veto power over any legislator ideas.

And so, Bangerter is one of the last people we need making Montana laws.  Thankfully, with a top quality candidate like Kelsen in the race, it looks like Bangerter’s is one more seat that the Republicans won’t be keeping.

To find out more about Kelsen, visit her website.  Kelsen grew up in Havre and Helena and has spent the last 15 years working to end domestic and sexual violence. She currently serves as the Executive Director for the Montana Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, which is a statewide non-profit.

138 Comments on "The TEA Party Doesn’t Represent Helena"

  1. What? Lobbyists writing legislation? (cough cough ACA cough cough… This never happens! cough cough Telecom cough cough… And she lied about her intentions when she ran? That is not right! cough cough Tester Tester Tester cough cough.

    Cowgirl, I officially nominate you for the Alert Citizens Brigade. You can be president.

  2. This gentlemen seems to think that the fact that ALEC is writing legislation for slow-witted legislators is obvious. But I haven’t seen it reported in any local papers.

    The ideas Bangerter comes up with herself are also bad. In fact, Bangerter’s ideas are often in line with Bozeman GOP Legislator Tom Burnett. They both belong to the Mormon Church and believe that we can best help the poor by giving tax breaks to companies who allow poor kids to “glean” from their dumpsters. Bangerter said this in a legislative interim committee meeting earlier this year. They put this woman on the Children and Families Interim Committee, which is already pretty full of dim bulbs.

  3. ALEC in Montana

    Montana Legislators with ALEC Ties

    House of Representatives
    Rep. Dennis Himmelberger (R-47)[17], former State Chairman[121]
    Rep. David Howard (R-60)[20]; Civil Justice Task Force
    Rep. Gary MacLaren (R-89)[17], State Chairman[20][122]; Health and Human Services Task Force
    Rep. Ken Peterson (R-46)[17][20]; Civil Justice Task Force
    Rep. Scott Reichner (R-9), State Chairman[123]; Telecommunications and Information Technology Task Force
    Rep. Cary Smith (R-55),[17][20] ALEC Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force member and guest at the December 2010 meeting of the International Relations Task Force[28]
    Rep. Wendy Warburton (R-34)[20]; Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force
    Rep. Roy Hollandsworth (R-28); Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force
    Rep. Bill James Beck, Sr. (R-6)[17]; Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force
    Rep. Elsie M. Arntzen (R-53)[17]; Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force
    Rep. Jesse A. O’Hara (R-18); Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force
    Rep. Dan D Skattum (R-62); Education Task Force
    Rep. Mark W. Blasdel (R-10); Education Task Force
    Rep. Gordon Hendrick (R-14); Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force
    Rep. Lee Randall (R-39); Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force
    Rep. John Esp (R-61); Health and Human Services Task Force
    Rep. Liz Bangerter (R-80); Health and Human Services Task Force
    Rep. Steve Lavin (R-8); Public Safety and Elections Task Force
    Rep. Tom McGillvray (R-50); Civil Justice Task Force
    Rep. Dee Brown (R-3)[17]
    Rep. Michael More (R-70)[17]
    Rep. Mike Miller (R-84)[17]
    Former Rep. Fran Wendelboe (R-1)[17]

    Sen. Jeff Essmann (R-28)[20]
    Sen. Bob Lake (R-44); Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force
    Sen. Llewelyn C. Jones (R-14); Telecommunications and Information Technology Task Force
    Former Sen. Roy Brown (R-25)[17]

    • From Bangerter’s own website:

      I believe that this country was founded as “one nation under God” and needs to remain that way.

      I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman.

      I believe that life begins at conception.

  4. Just a question. I am not one to promote either party affiliation. I believe that both parties need to do what is right for the people. This running one another down is unproductive and completely unprofessional. I visit this website and it sounds like high school kids bullying one another. Back to my question, why is it that the Democrats have made trafficking humans for profit like you would cattle,a business? I say the same to the Republicans. I have been involved in countless hours of research concerning this problem and I am tired of no one taking accountability. I have internal investigative documents that prove and back up 100% what I am saying. This is not a subject that I can be browbeaten down with. Not with what I have. CCA wants to buy out the prisons, Montana has been thinking on it. MCE has been operating as a corporation also. There are wrongful convictions. Lobbyists have been writing laws concerning this and CCA a large corporation has been donating to campaigns. Wining and dining and giving the kickbacks. I don’t know how anyone can sleep at night that would do this to their fellow Montanans. Why are the politicians silent on this subject? Montana is known to be a lock em and throw away the key. Democrats have been a big part of this. The Unions have even turned their backs on their own members who have served, especially one that has served your communities more than anyone that I know. Montanans have the right to know.

    • This woman Mejustice above is a well known promoter of conspiracy theories supposedly going on. Real nutty stuff. It’s unfortunate that she has found this forum. Sigh.

    • You make a lot of accusations but provide no evidence to support them. Further, what does your accusations have to do with the article in question?

      My suggestion to you would be to write your own Blog/website and promote it. If this really is as big an issue as you claim it to be, it will receive the attention it deserves. “Fight the good fight” but you will have to be able to prove it and this is not the forum for that fight.

      As a side note… When you spend more time claiming absolute belief in something and telling people that discussing it/arguing it with you is pointless than you do actually making your case, you are already behind the curve. I usually avoid discussing anything with blind believers because they are not interested in facts/truth/justice. They are simply interested in self gratification. Mark is a perfect example of this.

  5. I believe conspiracy theories are only those that have a theory without any documentation. Why do you think there is an organization suing DOJ for the rights to these documents. It has been in all the newspapers. They too know what is in them. That is not a conspiracy theory. If that is the case, this whole blog is also a conspiracy theory. As I said, I do not promote either party, so who would I be doing this for? I tell the Republicans the same thing. Corruption needs to be taken out. Montanans that really care is spreading like wildfire and growing in large numbers. It’s not (she) it is (we) and we will be heard.

  6. Proof of the quality of the Havre Public School system if I ever saw it. Ms. Young would make a great legislator.

  7. I didn’t happen to follow this blog, this blog happens to follow me on twitter. I do have complete evidence to back up what I am saying. I have already been in meetings and showing them. And if you will know Moorcat, I am way ahead of you on that. There is a blog/website already. Montana Cowgirl has followed it. Every article that is on there is backed up with links to the proof. I do not allow for anything to be posted without proof and factual documentation. Anyone can discuss it with me, don’t know where you got that idea from. I just said that I won’t be browbeaten down, that is all. Neither will all of the rest of the organization. The website is I haven’t needed to promote it…it’s promoted itself. You told me to start one, well this is just showing you that it is already there. Thank you for allowing me to speak.

    • OK… I went to your website/blog and I am somewhat confused. What is the issue you want to address – The privitization of Montana Prisons, Wrongful incarceration, or some other issue? Your links, posts and information is all over the place.

  8. Entirely off topic –so annoying.

    • Seems to me this is a voice that needs an airing. Generally when powerless people try to get attention, they have to bypass powerful people somehow. That mejustice comes to a dog-eared blog indicates some desperation. I could have told this person that appealing to Democrats when Democrats hold office is like lecturing the tides.

      Mejustice, please contact me via my blog, I want to know the rest of the story.

    • By the way, two things to know about “conspiracy theories”: 1) powerful Americans never conspire but foreigners do, especially designated enemies. Secondly, people who posit that powerful Americans might act in concert based on shared objectives are by definition crazy. No further thinking required.

      Montana has a Democrat in office. This is a Democratic website. Turning the prison system over to for-profit corporations, even if I’ll-considered, will fly here. Your best hope is to see a republican governor elected, at which time you’ll see posts here about the evilness of republicans privatizing the prison system.

  9. Yikes.

    • SCOTUS review of MT Law is cause for hope. But even if they agree with MT law, the CU $$ will continue in US Senate and House races…unless we can get those categorized/classified as “state” races. The electorate of those offices is limited to MT boundaries so maybe(?). That way only the Presidential race would be considered a “national” race in MT. But for now the review of MT Corrupt Practices Act is good enough.


  10. Amazing! To make a statement about Liz and the Tea Party in the same sentence shows the lack of understanding of the truth or refusal to see the truth. If HD 60 goes from Liz to Kelsen, we go from bad to worse and take one more step to total socialism forfeiting freedom and sovereignty.

    • Rai and Jiri at Lungha. Rai of Lowani. Lowani under two moons. Jiri of Ubaya. Ubaya of crossroads, at Lungha. Lungha, her sky gray.

    • Says the guy kicked out of the real Helena TEA Party…

    • Sir, you do not represent the patriot movement nor Contitutional scholarship. This candidate has voted for Freedom and the Constititional principles and for cutting the government spending that has broken our business climate to its current weakened state. The TEA party is about limited government, NOT racism.

      • PP, If the Tea Party isn’t about racism, where were they when a white president was spending billions on bogus wars and tax cuts for millionaires? The only expanation is that the Tea Party grew out of white backlash against our first black president. The deficit was only a problem when Obama assumed office.

        • Those are stooges planted by the Professional Left to discredit the Patriot Movement. ACORN among others, mobilized dissidents to inflict our rallies with fake signs. This has been widely reported by independent radio.

        • Turner,

          As a candidate for office, I would have hoped that you had better sense than that (at least better targeting ability).

          First, Tax Cuts and Funding for Wars is not a function of the Chief Executive. It is a function of Congress. Period. To try to blame President Obama for either is just silly.

          Second, while I agree with the racism being leveled against the President, that Racism had to exist in the first place. This is hardly the Tea Parties fault (though they have appeared to embrace it with open arms). Further, there were a hell of a lot more problems than the deficit when President Obama took office such as –

          1) Two wars and a brush fire
          2) A collapsed housing market (which, BTW was what triggered the economic crisis in the first place)
          3) Major banks, Auto Manufacturers and Industries in Crisis
          4) A broken health care system that the voters made clear needed to be addressed
          5) A politically divided country the likes of which hadn’t been seen since the early Reagan years (and some would say since the Nixon years)
          6) A country that was hampered by fear mongering caused by a terrorist attack and then capitalized on by the Bush administration.

          I could go on (there are plenty more issues to address…) but the point is that the deficit (while being a serious issue – but one that has been an issue for over a decade) was hardly the only issue inherited by President Obama.

          • Sheesh, a bit testy, aren’t we? Turner’s comment was spot on concerning the very hypocrisy exhibited by the Tea Party, and showed nothing about Turner’s acumen as a candidate. If you want to knit-pick, then, yes, it is precisely the job of the Executive to “spend” the money that office requests from Congress. Notice, “spend” is the word that Turner used, and precisely the allegation that the Tea Party levels at Obama and was hypocritically silent about concerning Dumbya.

            • Yes, as a matter of fact, I am testy about people blaming the sitting president for the incompetance of Congress. I hear it enough from the Conservative side to accept it from the Democrats. At least the Republicans have a reason for the misrepresentation.

              One of my problems with Turner’s message was that while he referenced the “white president”, he went on to claim that the Tea Party grew out of the election of a black president. That is a complete misrepresentation of the past. The Tea Party was well and truly formed long before Obama took office. In fact, it was in full swing when Clinton looked to be the Democratic Candidate. The racism that you see now probably did form out of the election of the current president, I will agree with that.

              As far as the President “spending” the money given he requests from Congress, that is misdirection. The President doesn’t hold the purse strings… Congress does. You have said that more than once in the recent past and it is important that people realise this.

              If a candidate honestly believes that Obama’s only problem was the deficit, it IS a reflection on the person as a candidate. Understand that I do support Turner’s bid against Barrett, but I find his characterization silly, if for no other reason than that the deficit is a problem for CONGRESS not the President.

              • The Tea Party has been around since the Civil War, only then it was called the “KKK” or “Klan”

              • Moorcat, please remember that the first Tea Party rallies were held on April 15th in 2009. The largest in the US was held right here in Bozeman, Montana. Look it up, and you will find marchers in the snow holding placards that Obama was a Kenyon, signs telling of the impending doom of socialism that Obama will force on the US (he’d been in the White House less than 3 months) and anti-tax tirades galore. That’s not to mention Marbut’s input of how the White House would take all your guns. One of the organizers of this charade was himself a tax-thief.

                I would certainly never stop you from claiming that the ‘tea party’ was well formed in 1992, but you are quite factually wrong. There was no damned Tea Party until 2009.

                Just as we’ve discussed this before, we are talking past each other because you are arguing ideals and I am arguing reality. You are presenting a history of an ideal as if it were the Tea Party. It isn’t. It never was. The Tea Party began in 2009, 3 short days after Obama’s inauguration, by Trever Leach. Then Rick Santelli had a melt down, oooh. It wasn’t until April 15th, 2009, that there was a “Tea Party”. Yes, the sentiment was there before that, but so fricking what? The fertilizer (and I use that pointedly) for the populist movement was exactly the election of a Black President. I know that correlation is not causation, but I find it much easier to believe Turner than I do to believe you.

                You still the Tea Party as an idea driving like minded people who believe in fiscal restraint. I see it as what it is when presented as my representation. I see it as an asshole who spent campaign funds to film a city worker moving his campaign signage of of public land. I see it as a tax thief willing to justify his illegal behavior by begging the rest of us to blame the very rules we follow so that he won’t have to in the future. I see it as a jackwad who wants the state to be able to overturn federal mandates while still collecting the $1.56 that Montana gets for every dollar we pay to the federal treasury. I see it as the morons who show up at political events with their ARs and then accuse others of being “anti-gun” when we point out how fucking stupid that is. I see it as Mormon legislators who would rather our children dumpster dive than actually pay for nutrition in our schools, nutrition they themselves took advantage of. I see it as people who would rather teach biblical shame then provide the education that decreases abortion and controls the spread of STDs. I see the Tea Party wailing about “individual mandate” with no understanding at all what proper health care controls could provide.

                I am sorry, my brother. You are arguing ideals as if they are held by the “Tea Party” when those moral principles aren’t held at all.

                • I hate arguing with you but the first tea party rally held was done by Ron Paul in 2008. This idea was later adopted (some say stolen) by Trevor Leach and others. I find it interesting that most sites give credit to Leach, Santelli and Carendar instead of Paul. He had the ball rolling long before they took over the “grassroots” movement.

                  Oh well, I guess it doesn’t matter. The Tea party is a joke now and I do not have any moral connection or belief in them. I simply hope that the majority of Americans are over that insanity.

                  • Michael Searalika | April 10, 2012 11:25 PM at 11:25 PM |

                    Yes Moorecat your right, Ron Pauls Tea Party, But remember Ron Paul is a bigot himself. so the fact is some truth can be derived by Mr Turner and Your brother! In some ways your all right, as to what the Tea Party has itself become…..

                    The story and contents of the Ron Paul newsletters can best be described as appalling. Blacks were referred to as “animals.” Gays were told to go “back” into the “closet.” The “X-Rated Martin Luther King” was a bisexual pedophile who “seduced underage girls and boys.”

                    In the 1990s, Ron Pau; described Dr. King as a “world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and “seduced underage girls and boys.” He even claimed – without a hint of proof – that Dr. King “made a pass at” fellow civil rights warrior Ralph Abernathy, who succeeded King as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC).-Florida Courier

                    “What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!” He added, “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”-Ron Paul

                    Three months before the Oklahoma City bombing, Paul praised right-wing, anti-government militia movements as “one of the most encouraging developments in America.” The voluminous record of bigotry and conspiracy theories speaks for itself. then there is, as a Congressman, his years-long record of supporting racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and far-right militias.

                    Yep, I am amazed the Tea party went to Santorum, when they had a nutcase like this to follow! But I am sure it is because the Republicans christains of today( Which I know you are not a part of Moorecat) Like seeing people die in war, and the poor as far as the tea party is considered, are the reason the country went bankrupt!

                    I Agree with all of you on this one. because you all have brought about the truth!

                    • Micheal,

                      None of what you say about Ron Paul was part of of the Tea party rallies in 2008. In fact, one of the primary platforms of the Paul campaign was that the government had no business in our personal lives. Racism wasn’t even blip on the radar until after the election. The letters you refer to did not even “surface” until this year and certainly weren’t a part of the campaign in 2008.

                      I freely admit that Paul is a nutcase. Read my responce down below. That does not stop me from respecting some of his veiwpoints. The sun has to shine on a dog’s ass once in a while.

                    • Michael Searalika | April 11, 2012 12:49 AM at 12:49 AM |

                      LOL and shine it does my friend!

          • Huh? Where did you get the idea that was I blaming Obama? He wasn’t the white president I was referring to that lied us into a bloody and ruinous war in Iraq. He wasn’t the president who gave us “the Bush tax cuts.”

            While you’re technically correct about the congress’s role in taxing and spending, Bush openly embraced the economic plans delivered to his desk for signatures.

            The economic disaster handed to Obama was caused by a number of actions, though. Some of them went back to the Clinton administration — for example, the effective repeal of Glass-Steagall in, I think, 1992, that led to Wall Street going crazy with our money.

            • I sort of explained it in my answer to Rob. You asked “where were they when a white president was spending billions on bogus wars and tax cuts for millionaires?” The simple answer is that they didn’t exist when the war with Iraq was declared.

              The Tea Party formed when it looked like the Democrats were going to make a HUGE victory in the 2008 elections. It was obvious that the country was tired of “Bush Politics” and the Tea Party was the “grassroots” effort to divorce themselves of the Bush administration while fighting the upcoming Democrat takeover. The racist aspect of the Tea Party came to light when Obama won the primary (much to the surprise of just about everyone). I suspect now that the racist aspect was always there – as people who tend to be racist would be attracted by the early Tea Party message – but it gained a voice when they had an obvious target.

              All that changes nothing. Bush was Bush and Obama is Obama. The Bush Tax cuts helped a hell of a lot of people (not just the millionares) and that is why there was a HUGE public outcry when it looked like our current Congress was going to let them expire. Even the message the current Democrats are trying to float is a misrepresentation. President Obama does not want to let the Bush Tax Cuts expire. He wants to modify the Bush Tax Cuts to exclude people who make over 250K a year.

              Yes, I am nitpicking. It is my nature to do so. Maybe I expect more out of candidates. Whatever the reason, I want to see just ONE candidate step away from the partisan political crap and say something that doesn’t have to be parsed or qualified.

              • The Tea Party formed when it looked like the Democrats were going to make a HUGE victory in the 2008 elections.

                The TEA Party formed in Feb of 2009 – well AFTER the 2008 election. Rick Santelli (sp) on CNN gave birth to it in one of his comments on CNBC.

                • See my reply to Rob. The Tea Party idea was “adopted” by Leach, Santelli and Carendar from a rally run by Ron Paul in 2008. By the time it was taken by these three, it had morphed (primarily because of the election of a black man). It would have been interesting to see what it would have developed into had Obama not been elected. I guess we will never know. The Tea Party as it exists today is a joke.

            • “I wish they weren’t called the ‘Bush tax cuts’,” he said, surmising that they would be less likely to be raised if someone else’s name was attached.


            • Until such time as Obama actually fights to repeal the Bush tax cuts, they are the Obama tax cuts for the wealthy. He used the pretext of extending unemployment benefits last time (aka “framing”) to extend them. Next time he’ll have another pretext.

              Thise cuts were not significant for most people except those who might have dividends and capital gains. For most people these items are behind the 401K/IRA wall and will be taxed as ordinary income when finally released, so cuts on div/CG mean nothing.

              I think discussion of the Tea Party that treat it as a natural uprising are overlooking the money behind the movement and the Fox News factor. It appeared to me to be PR manipulation, a creation used to push through ACA, as it made Obama appear to be a leftist – socialist, they called him. That perception In mind, the majority of the public saw ACA as reform, and fell I to the trap.

              Never assume that American politics is natural. It’s all pretty much stage managed. Early in the 20th century, with the universal franchise, it was decided that,politics had to be for show only.

              • Since Congress will have to pass a bill first…..

                we’ll just have to wait and see what happens

                The Bush Tax cut did not affect me much … but I do pay a higher percentage than Mittens



              • It’s not rocket science. Either the rich pay more or they do not. Democrats have had 3.5 years. No change. What do you make of it? Are they unable to fight? Or unwilling?

                • Michael Searalika | April 11, 2012 12:04 AM at 12:04 AM |

                  Let me Introduce you newbies to Mark Tokarski, an earth Hater, a woman hater, a pathological Liar, and Republican court Jester and Conservative tool attacking the commentators on this blog! He lies to democrats daily with his circular reasoning!

                  No Little Mark cupcake,

                  It is a republican led congress in which all economic bills must originate or pass from the House!

                  Quit lying to the masses with such an Idiotic statements Tool! Quit pointing people away from the true wording of the Constitution( instead of the fox version). Anyone can look up Article 1 Section 8 of the constitution and know that the GOP which ran the House could of written bills to help us out of the mess they created when they took office…… But they did nothing, cuz they didn’t like the black president!

                  Congress can even write job bills for Americans like they did in FDR’s time( when republicans were at least caring individuals and true Christians), but they lost their spine, Idealogy, and virtue, a long time ago when they went to bed in Mass with Corporate Powers.

                  Now The tea Party of today Believes Reagan is a god for attacking workers rights. Republicans would rather be the chained pets of super lobbyists, and allow American middle class to work slave wages, starve, or lose their houses! There your people Tokarski, Embrace them, just like your Mime Mr. Moore who wants people to have Less for americans in this country!

                  A president can only suggest a bill, but it has to be passed by the House in order to help the country economically!

                  Man I thought you knew the Constitution Cupcake? Still pathologically Lying as a tool of the right, I see?

      • limiting the power of people to resist racism, right?

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | April 10, 2012 11:32 AM at 11:32 AM |

          Actually, the motto of the Teatards is Socialism for Me and Not for Thee! You see, the Teatards here in GF consist mainly of farmers recieiving their hated gubmint subsidies, retired military lifers getting their hated gubmint retirement checks, and all SORTS of other wacks sucking LARGE off’n Unca Sugarteat!

          And whenever I pointed that out, they went ballastic stating that they had EARNED theirs, and they didn’t want to share with loafers! They’re some really sad cases.

      • If the TEA Party isn’t about racism, why the push for nullification.

        As TIME Magazine reported on the worst legislature on Montana history:

        “Nullification is a way to “awaken the masses,” Kerns says. “We
 must save the Republic, and we will not do that if we continue on this 
unsustainable path.”

        But nullification also has a controversial history. It was invoked by South Carolina lawmakers seething over tariff laws in the antebellum South, and again during the civil-rights era, when states opposed to the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954 used the idea of interposition, nullification’s kissing cousin, as a mechanism to resist integration. Proponents are eager to dispel the stigma
 shrouding the concept, which Madison and Jefferson popularized in the
 Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798. “It just gets back to the Constitution,” Republican presidential hopeful Gary Johnson said of nullification in a recent interview. “It really is a formula for righting all our wrongs.” But the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that federal law trumps that of the states.”

        Read more:

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | April 10, 2012 4:47 PM at 4:47 PM |

        No I disagree you are only interested in changing the constitution. You believe corporations running the government are better at it then the people…. You had a chance to fix things and have made it worse or threaten too not help the children, degrade and make women 2nd class citizens, leave the elderly without medicare or social security, Almost forced this country into default. Your Kind hurt our nation by torturing people and forgoing the the Geneva convention. Your people have lied about WMD to get into wars. Failed to find the man who killed 3000 thousand in New York…. Should I go on? The people you sent to Washington have said no to everything, and produced no Jobs, Wall street was allowed to run so wild in the last eight years of Bush it crashed in September 2008.

        You have hidden the price of war for so long, that when we finally added that price tag to the Budjet we were almost totally broke, and it is the poor people of this countries Fault?????? Really?

        I think your kind need a reality check, and need to go back to school and learn the history of this country!

        • Eesh!

          • What? You saw a mouse? Grow a pair, Mark.

            • “Eesh!” is an expression of disgust, and not fear.

              Hey, wanna debate ACA? Show off your chops? Any day, any time, any place. Bring it, Bubba.

              • Jennifer Davies | April 10, 2012 6:26 PM at 6:26 PM |

                Actually, “eesh” is an expression of distress.

              • It sounded like fear to me. I doubt I’m alone.

                I’ll happily debate the ACA with you. Oh wait! I’ve done that before and all you did was rely on your circular reasoning bullshit. (Have you forgotten that I have full access to the archives at LITW?)

                I’ve already brought it, Bubba. You can’t recognize agreement when it teabags you. You can’t recognize disagreement when it’s well argued. You’ve banned me at your website so there will be no discussion there, and you lie about “any place”. It’s been done brought and you fled like a little tiny child.

                Care to try again?

                • I sometimes wonder why you don’t understand politics, as you do politics very well on a personal level. Yes, you have access to LITW archives, yes, you think you did quite well, no, I have no clue what might have passed there. But you put tha up here as fait accompli.

                  So, to your non-answer, let me rephrase a bit: You want some of this, you sorry sack of shit? bring it baby! I’ll take you on anywhere, anytime, any place. Oh yeah, and your kid brother too. I saw his stuff at his blog. He too has nuthin’.

                  It’s time to ball up Rod. My place? Yours? Put up or go away.

              • In that case I should said “Aye Karumba!” Norma went deep on us, and came up blather.

                • So, you capitulate. Small wonder …

                • No you sorry sack of shit. I do not “capitulate.” do you have any hobbies? friends? just asking’.

                  • eesh…

                  • Tokarski, let’s be clear. I work very hard to help others. My time is limited. You laze having inherited a business. You blather on no matter how much. I don’t give a salient shit about what you think I have for hobbies or friends. If you want to make an argument, Mr. 1%er, then make it. This is where we stand our ground, though I think you have no ability to do so.

                    • Yes, I get it. You do not want to debate me. You’ve got a shopping list of excuses, “I’m too busy” the first. Next comes “I have to take my dog to the vet;” and then “my arthritis is acting up.”

                      You got nuthin’. Any time, any place, you ssos.

                      How about if you can sit in the middle of a circle and have Kralzy and Kenny and Monty II and Larry and Norma throw rocks at me every time I talk .. Would you feel safer? Isn’t that how it works with cowards .. you hide in groups?

                • Michael Searalika | April 11, 2012 12:12 AM at 12:12 AM |

                  No she didn’t, Norma kicked your puny ass often here sometimes at a daily clip!

                  Poor Lil Lying shit disturber and poo poo thrower Mark Tokarski. The man who lies about his business and anyone else if he has the time!

                  What a waste of human flesh, and blog space you have become!

                • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | April 11, 2012 10:10 AM at 10:10 AM |

                  You need to stop using my name in vain when I am not here to defend myself Jerk!

                  Secondly, You do not know how to debate or tell the truth so why would rob or anyone bother debating a Buncomber!

                  Lastly, I have wiped the floor with you, and your insane comments more times then I can count, As Michael has said a few dozen times before you are a Pathological Liar…. so your easy to discount, and discredit!

    • Don’t be a stranger Tim! Please continue to share your insights with us. Is it true you have given yourself the title of Commander Tim Ravndal of the 69th Division of the Conservative Helena Tea Party Patriots?

    • Again, this from the guy that openly advocated killing gay people. You are a joke, Tim. Please crawl back into the hole you crawled out of.

  11. Ummmm…not off topic, this was about corporations contributing to campaigns and lobbyists making laws was in a comment…didn’t I respond to this very topic? It is very annoying that yet again the subject remains silent about how both parties seem to have an issue with this. Corporations are already funding campaigns. You can’t have the luxury of picking and choosing what is considered a Corporation or a lobbyist. They are what they are. Easy to say “Off Topic” and brush it away yet again. Let’s get to some real issues.

  12. I’ve never seen your blog before there is some interesting stuff there please keep it up. They, as in the operators of the blog, will dismiss you because I see you have some posts on there critical of Schweitzer and Bullock for taking money from the for profit prison industry. I imagine the majority of the posters and people reading this probably actually agree with many of your stances against the criminal justice system.

  13. Kelsen Young appears to be a strong candidate hopefully she will dispatch Ms. Bangerter back to the tour train with all due haste.

  14. From our fellow Westerners over at the Desert Beacon blog:

    There has been a deluge of anti-voting rights bills in recent state legislatures, and they are directly related to ALEC activity:

    “ALEC is directly tied to the emerging trend among state legislatures to consider voter ID laws. Using false allegations of “voter fraud,” right-wing politicians are pursuing policies that disenfranchise students and other at-risk voters,–including the elderly and the poor–who are unlikely to have drivers’ licenses or other forms of photo ID. By suppressing the vote of such groups, ALEC’s model “Voter ID Act” grants an electoral advantage to Republicans while undermining the right to vote. In addition, ALEC wants to make it easier for corporations to participate in the political process. Their Public Safety and Elections taskforce is co-chaired by Sean Parnell of the Center for Competitive Politics, one of the most vociferous pro-corporate election groups, and promotes model legislation that would devastate campaign finance reform and allow for greater corporate influence in elections.” [PFAW]

    Enacting burdensome regulations regarding voter identification and access to the polls has been a hallmark of ALEC model legislation. Thirty three state legislatures considered such legislation in 2011 alone. Wisconsin, Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina and Tennessee have passed such bills. [Nation]

  15. McDonald’s ends support for ALEC: ThinkProgress.

  16. Jack Ruby, I believe that you are right as far as many would agree with the stances I am making against the criminal justice system. They should just take a look and then decide for themselves. I am not trying to be critical of Schweitzer and Bullock, I am just stating the facts. I am for any democrat or any republican if they do right for Montanans. I just want Montanans to be safe and not have to worry about their friends or family getting locked up because of not having the right for due process.

  17. Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | April 10, 2012 1:09 PM at 1:09 PM |

    Listen dear patriotic misfits to the word of Thomas Jefferson:

    When we come to the moral principles on which the government is to be administered, we come to what is proper for all conditions of society. I meet you there in all the benevolence and rectitude of your native character; and I love myself always most where I concur most with you. Liberty, truth, probity, honor, are declared to be the four cardinal principles of your Society. I believe with you that morality, compassion, generosity, are innate elements of the human constitution; that there exists a right independent of force; that a right to property is founded in our natural wants, in the means with which we are endowed to satisfy these wants, and the right to what we acquire by those means without violating the similar rights of other sensible beings ; that no one has a right to obstruct another, exercising his faculties innocently for the relief of sensibilities made a part of his nature; that justice 1 is the fundamental law of society : that the majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.

    Do you understand what the father of our Declaration of Independence means by this. Do you have any clue to what one of our most famous architects meant by saying this????????

    You Tea Party people are just plain wrong!

  18. “the majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime”

    “no one has a right to obstruct another”

    Do you seriously quote that and still support the individual mandate?

    • Do you seriously quote that and still support the individual mandate?

      I can, would and do. Let me hit you with an individual mandate that the SCROTUS cannot overturn: Every fricking one of us will require health care. Not some, not most, not just the young or the rich or the old or the poor. Every single freaking one of us will require health care. No exceptions.

      The “individual mandate” as you call it is not individual at all. It requires that everyone pays a share of what everyone of us needs. No exceptions. What is actually an individual mandate is when some jackwad 20 year old with no insurance breaks his leg on a ski hill. He goes to the emergency room, and someone has to pay. That would be you and me who pay. He has no right to “obstruct another”, and yet he costs me more money and jacks up the cost of any health care I may require in the future. You too, though I doubt you’re smart enough to notice that fact.

      Our health care system is not one in which the majority oppresses the individual, but quite the opposite. The individual frequently oppresses the majority. And you think that the majority, requiring the minority to pay a share of what everyone of us needs is oppression? I suggest you go back to school and learn basic math and economics.

      • You quite miss the point, of course. You do understand that health care must be universal and that all have to share the burden. I’ll grant you that much. The problem is that Obama (as if) and Baucus (as if) took that essential core need, and leveraged it into a state mandate to buy insurance from private corporations without public competition. That’s a problem.

        One, with the mandate in place and no regulations regarding basic coverage, insurers are free to undersell each other by scrimping on coverage. So we are all free to under-insure ourselves, as we surely will. I am under-insured now, and to make matters worse, with passage of ACA and the long delay before implemention, insurers have been cutting back – my insurer, Anthem BCBS, no longer covers office visits. It’s not a co-pay, not part of the deductible, not counted as out of pocket. They simply qiot covering office visits. Guess what that means – people no longer go to the doctor until they have an emergent problem.That’s the problem with private coverage – people are strapped, and so regard that nasty monthly premium as their monthly cost that they do not want to add on to. Insurers know this. They simply don’t care.

        Second, no cost controls. That’s just crazy. Some will say that markets take care of that, but markets only function to the benefit of those with market power, and In a private mandate situation, that is not consumers. So Obama and Baucus put us at the mercy of private corporations. Of course, for a price. They are notmwhores, after all. They are prostitutes. Would either be in office without those private bribes?

        Finally, the loss payout – back before big corps took over the nfp’s,min the 90’s, loss payout was around 90%’ and this is before Hillary attempted to corporatize the system. That’s not great, as every other civilized country does better. But now it is around 80%, and keep in mind that out of that 80% comes hospital and doctor administrative costs. That 80% is only what insurance companies pay out in claims, with overhead from other parts of the system caused by the insurers must be absorbed it that number.

        Private insurers have perverse incentives, as they cannot serve investors and patients at once. They have to squeeze one to serve the other. Since investors are an organized force and patients not, guess who gets squeezed?

        So your notion hat the private mandate is a public good is nonsense. The only way to serve the public good is to remove the profit incentive from basic health care. Every other industrial democracy has done this. Obama had a chance, and sold us out.

        And the funny thing is that there was never any bargaining on his part. It was a done deal before he ever chimed in. The bill that passed in the end was the bill written by Wellpoint in the beginning. It was a charade, and Obama knew it was a charade. That means that he knew as he ran for office, gave his speeches, led us down that path, that he was going to sell us out.

        That is the mark of a third class man, and an excellent politician. Evidence of the latter is the faith you all have in him even as he openly sticks it to you.

        • Michael Searalika | April 11, 2012 12:20 AM at 12:20 AM |

          Shorter Mark Tokarski: I like to lie about Everything I write. I am the best “Bescumber” I know!

          • Michael, this comment from Tokarski goes back to the response I gave you earlier. Many of his facts concerning the actual implementation of the ACA as policy are accurate. Many people, far better grounded than Tokarski, have agreed with him on several things such as the flawed reliance on Insurance companies, and their perverse incentives. I’ve argued the same thing with one of his other mortal enemies at one of those disagreeing websites that none of us ever go to. No, where Mark jumps the rails is in leaping to pseudo-moral conclusions that don’t follow at all from ‘his’ facts.

            See, because Mark feels he owns these facts, personally, he gives his pseudo-moral pronouncements; and if you don’t agree, then you must not know his facts, hence you are immoral. That is why it is pointless to debate him. My brother highlighted many of those flaws with the ACA and yet Tokarski still puffs his chest and demands a duel.

            Tokarski begins his puffery by claiming that I “missed the point”. No I didn’t. Steerinc made a claim of hypocrisy (immorality) if one believes in liberty but still supports the Individual mandate. My response was directly to the point, that the individual mandate is necessary for a just society. Everybody pays or someone is getting screwed. That is fundamental to each and every universal health care system, regardless of implementation, and very much the point of my response to Steerinc. But Mark has his facts, and concludes that:

            So your notion hat the private mandate is a public good is nonsense.

            Notice, I was arguing the individual mandate, not the specific “private mandate” of the ACA, though the same moral argument applies to that as well. Tokarski is again flummoxed by any view of morality that doesn’t serve his circular reasoning.

    • Attention Tea Party:
      “In July of 1798, Congress passed – and President John Adams signed – “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.” The law authorized the creation of a government operated marine hospital service and mandated that privately employed sailors be required to purchase health care insurance.”

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | April 10, 2012 4:28 PM at 4:28 PM |

      Darn tooting I support ACA, better it and work on it like Medicare, Social Security, then nothing! Did you miss this:

      “When we come to the moral principles on which the government is to be administered, we come to what is proper for all conditions of society.”

      Or this:

      “I believe with you that morality, compassion, generosity, are innate elements of the human constitution; that there exists a right independent of force; that a right to property is founded in our natural wants, in the means with which we are endowed to satisfy these wants, and the right to what we acquire by those means without violating the similar rights of other sensible beings”

      Obviously, you read only the parts that give to you but not of others. Health care for all is a “natural right!” Do you wish to deny it to others? Isn’t it a basic right like education, the right to a fair trial, a right to privacy?

      “No government has a legitimate right to do what is not for the welfare of the governed.” To PRESIDENT WASHINGTON, 1792

      Thomas Jefferson

      “A government regulating itself by what is wise and just for the many, uninfluenced by the local and selfish views of the few who direct their affairs, has not been seen, perhaps, on earth. Or if it existed, for a moment, at the birth of ours, it would not be easy to fix the term of its continuance. Still, I believe it does exist here in a greater degree than anywhere else; and for its growth and continuance.”

      Thomas Jefferson

  19. Belgrade wackjob Art Wittich was in the Missoulian today foaming on about his referendum to nullify the individual mandate.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | April 10, 2012 7:36 PM at 7:36 PM |

      How very mormon of him! It’s part and parcel of who they are. You see, GOD tol’ them that they’re chosen!……to lead the gubmint! Which might be OK with some folks, but the part about not jackin’ off while on a mission? Well, I can’t go for that!

  20. Has anyone bothered to look at the conservative voting “score” Rep. Bangerter got from Koopman’s Montana Conservatives? Below is a sample of some of the good TEA Party people. Of course, it’s “Koopman” and nothing he says is valid.

    Mike Milburn 26
    Tom Berry 22
    Roy Hollandsworth 22
    Walter McNutt 22
    Steve Gibson 21
    Steve Fitzpatrick 19
    Brian Hoven 18
    Harry Klock 17
    Jesse O’Hara 17
    Max Yates 17
    Lila Evans 16
    Rob Cook 14
    Duane Ankney 10
    Liz Bangerter 8
    Gary MacLaren 8

    • Koopman’s report doesn’t factor in religious zealotry.

      • Glad you have researched all the bills from Mr. “the world is only 6000 years old”.

      • I’ve been doing this for years. Learn what you are talking about before you spew your garbage all over the internet.

        • And yet, after all these years, you still cannot put forth a factual argument – you must continually act with out facts.

          • Sigh. It’s not my job to solve your intelligence gap.

            Social conservative activist Dallas D. Erickson, from Montana Citizens for Decency through Law urges.

            “Don’t believe this [Koopman] report for a minute. This only takes into account fiscal bills.

            Any moral issues bills would be considered by this group as “more government”. The repeal of the marijuana law would probably be a “more government” bill. Any bill to regulate and control the killing of the unborn would be considered “more government”. This is a one sided report of two sides of a true conservative. Anyone getting high scores on this probably has a Libertarian bent. Libertarians believe that drugs and alcohol should have a free reign, no matter the impact it would have on the family so any bill to clamp down on drunk drivers or other crimes would be considered “more government”.”

  21. And, here we have Bangerter trying to pretend to be a moderate again. Classic example of the species fraudimus pondscuminus. Fascinating.

    • And, here we have Bangerter trying to pretend to be a moderate again

      Trying to pretend? Seems to me that Koopman fries her pretty good for being a flaming Liberal along with MacLaren and Ankney. She had no control or say over Koopman’s rating – please explain how she is trying to pretend?

  22. One thing no one ever accused Liz Bangerter of being is classy.

  23. Anyone who through a few votes so she could point to them later to claim she was a moderate is a complete fraud. Bangerter voted for nullfication. Anyone who voted for any bill Derek Skees sponsored is no moderate. She voted to force women to undergo a vaginal probe against her will. HB 280 Anyone who voted to make it harder to vote, as Bangerter did, is no moderate. HB 180

  24. BTW, anyone notice that the only one defending Bangerter on here is a complete douchebag?

    • Typical response of someone with nothing to say – attack the messenger and ignore the subject. Saul would be proud.

      • Says the person who called a woman “fat”

        • And Kristi Gualshes (sp) has not been attacked here because of her looks? I merely implied that Ms Young might have a problem fitting into the House chairs and I also slammed James Knox at the same time. Seems pretty nonpartisan/nonsexist to me.

    • Michael Searalika | April 11, 2012 12:27 AM at 12:27 AM |

      Yeah you right Butte Gal, another republican who thinks he can put a smarter woman in their place, by insulting them continually…..Paul seems to fit that mold pretty well! I betcha he believe Rush Limp-baugh’s views on women, makes him a good guy as well.
      Paul your a Scumbag, I agree!

  25. So basically what I am hearing is that Democrats will sacrifice anyone that is facing the criminal system? They want to protect everyone else but NO one stands up to the corruption that is so heavy in the judicial department. Moorcat, the blog is not all over the place, the blog covers one thing only. ALL the corruption that is going on in these sectors which happens to be, DOJ, DOC, Judges, Prosecuting Attorneys, Public Defenders, etc. If you don’t care that fellow Montanan families are suffering due to making a profit off of them and taxpayers, then that is a crying shame. As I said, I am not for either Republican or Democrats but it is made extremely clear here the way the wind blows. I’m sure the Feds would not like how the money is being spent. It was not even a desperate plea to have a discussion on who writes these laws up, who lobby’s for what organization, just to see where each party is coming from. I do sit in on the Law and Justice Committee Meetings and I am disheartened by the reaction that I am seeing. These unfortunate Montanans needs advocates and I see it’s not going to be found here. Torture the innocent men and women that are sitting in Montana prisons looks like the philosophy here….oh I forgot…this again will be considered “annoyingly off topic” excuse me for caring for the less fortunate of them all.

  26. I am more in touch with the political arena than what you realize. me4justice should give a clear indication on what we are advocating. I am more in touch with powerful people than what you realize, I have been dealing with both parties that are currently in office and those that are running. Meetings one on one, we as an organization wants to see who is going to finally stand up to correct this. There is no need for me to come back on here, I don’t like resorting to name calling, that would be considered bullying which by the way the laws are changing in Montana, that will end up putting bullies in prison here real soon. If you are not aware of what is even happening, I am gracious towards that. Now, you should become educated quick. There is not one excuse to not become educated about a subject that is as severe as this one.

  27. Ok.. Brief history lesson since everyone has seemed to developed amnesia about what happened in 2008.

    Rob is somewhat correct in that I was somewhat – ideologically – sympathetic to the “Tea Party” in the beginning. I want to think of myself as pragmatic, but it is a constant fight for me, because, at my core, I am an idealist. I would much rather see the world as it should be (or as I think it should be) rather than as it is.

    In 2008, Ron Paul was attempting to win the Presidency even though he didn’t stand an icecicle’s chance in hell. While the man is a complete nutjob conspiracy theorist, some of this stances made a buttload of sense. He attempted to start a ‘grassroots’ movement based on libertarian beliefs and while I didn’t buy into some of them, I really liked the idea of smaller, more effecient government and the completely hands off approach to social issues.

    This grassroots efforts started in small groups and often used email lists, online social chats and forums. They were rarely reported on by the media though occationally, a larger rally would occur and get reported. There was no clear organization and no clear goal (other than to support Ron Paul and limit government).

    In late 2007, a rally was held in Austin Texas and that was the first time that I know about where the term “Tea Party” was used. In March of 2008, Ron Paul held his “Tea Party Rally” in Wichita Kansas. This was the first “official” Ron Paul Tea party rally but a number of others followed. As it became more clear that the Democrats were going to win big in 2008, the rallys became more freestyle and while they did not help Ron Paul get elected, they did recruit a large following.

    When Obama won the election, these rallies stopped but the people organizing them felt that the message still needed to be said. In January of 2008, a “tea bag campaign” was initiated by Graham Makohoniuk inspired by a libertarian tactic from the early 70’s. This resurrected the idea of “Tea Party Rallys” and in February, when President Obama was inagurated, a number of high profile people jumped on the bandwagon including Karl Denninger and Dave Ramsey. Denninger is often credited with starting the Tea Party movement because of it, even though he was just taking someone else’s idea and running with it.

    Other people credited with starting the movement were Trevor Leach who organized a “Tea Party Protest” of Obesity taxes proposed in New York (it should be pointed out that Leach was an officer in Young Americans for liberty, a group that formed out of the “Students for Paul” organization), Keli Carendar who organized a rally in Seattle (though it was not called a “Tea Party” at the time, and Rick Santelli of CNBC. While all three of these people organized rallies in early 2009, they were simply capitalizing on an already existing movement that had lost steam.

    I think it is valid that racism and general hatred for Obama fueled the Tea Party movement into what it has become. The original libertarian ideas were certainly lost in the shuffle, as was the idea that the government had no place in our personal lives. What the Tea Party is now is worse than a joke – it is an embarrassment to our Country.

    That said, I still hold onto the idea of small government and that government has not place in my personal life. Yes, that is idealistic but it is what it is. Next time you all want to tell me I have no idea what the tea party is or where it started, please reconsider. I actually bought into some of it have been following it with some interest since it’s beginnings in 2008. I find it kind of sad that no one even remembers where it started.

    • It’s important to follow the money. Ron Paul’s original “tea party” event in 2007 was a fundraiser to commemorate of the original Boston Tea Party — he didn’t “launch” the tea party, he held a commemoration event.

      Conservapedia credits Rush Limbaugh for resurrecting the idea in a January 27, 2009 (six days after Obama’s inauguration) broadcast critical of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. And about 3 weeks later, CNBC’s Rick Santelli broadcast that “American needs a new kind of tea party” and within hours multiple state and local websites calling themselves “tea party” websites sprung up.

      But the current “Tea Party” movement didn’t develop any real steam until FreedomWorks and Americans For Prosperity (funded by oil and banking money from the Mellon’s and Koch Bros and fronted by, gasp, former Republican representative Dick Armey) helped launch the national protests in the spring of 2009, (with the substantial support of Fox News), and bankrolled organized opposition to national health care legislation introduced by the Democrats.

      Most of the ideas espoused by Tea Party followers have been around a long time. Many of those ideas led to the collapse of the American economy in the 1870s, 1890s, 1920s and — shocker — 2007. One has to credit the faith that these folks have in ideas that have never worked on a scale larger than a small town. (And even then, they only work in certain kinds of small towns producing certain kinds of goods). But I have to wonder at the disconnect between how the economy works on a global scale and how Tea Partier’s think it works.

      But I digress. To state that the current “Tea Party movement” existed before Obama’s election is categorically false.

      • Of course it didn’t… I never attended the four tea party get togethers in 2008. It was a figment of my imagination… just because you said so.

        Hate to burst your bubble, but there were dozens of Tea Party rallys held by Paul supporters and while many of them were fundraisers (it is what candidate supporters do, remember?), it was also to try to push a political agenda based around limited government. Guess you missed that part. You, Sir, are catagorically wrong.

        • And before anyone makes the tired “Paul-bot” comments, I did not support Ron Paul. As I said above, I pretty much thought then (and still do) that Paul is a nutcase. At the time, I couldn’t support McCain and while Obama talked real purty, I wasn’t sure I bought into the whole “Hope and Change” mantra. What I wanted to see is a scale back of the US Government, an end to Chimpy’s wars, an end to War on Drugs and a move away from the endless debates on social issues. I wanted to see our country focus on the nuts and bolts of making our country internally stronger. I liked the idea of a grassroots effort to scale back government. Sadly that movement was taken over when Obama was elected by the wingnuts, religious fanatics and racists.

  28. Michael Searalika | April 11, 2012 12:38 AM at 12:38 AM |

    The Mad Hatter’s Tea Party:

    Eplains a little more in depth, how a bunch of dumb “blue collar, mostly white Americans became the “Ninnyhammers,” and sign holders for big business…. AKA Tea Party Patriots!

  29. Jennifer Davies | April 11, 2012 8:22 AM at 8:22 AM |

    A couple of additional points about ALEC and the legislature. ALEC was set up so that these Republicans had to pay $100 bucks to join. Why would they pay for the privilege of becoming corporate pawns? Two reasons. Corporations have long known that price means value in the minds of some. That’s why giving something a mid range price point instead of a higher one can often cause a product to fail. Two, the corporations know that these idiots would feel like they had “wasted” their hundred bucks if they didn’t “use” their ALEC bills. And so, the corporate execs played these small minds like a fiddle.

Comments are closed.