Reply With Quote
tea baggers have always been nothing but frauds, fakes. Some of them may have felt "authentic", but the overall movement, the leadership was a fraud, with VRWC/1% $$$ making it go.
Study Confirms Tea Party Was Created by Big Tobacco and Billionaires
A new academic study confirms that front groups with longstanding ties to the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers planned the formation of the Tea Party movement more than a decade before it exploded onto the U.S. political scene.
The study, funded by the National Cancer Ins ute of the National Ins ute of Health, traces the roots of the Tea Party's anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s when tobacco companies began to invest in third party groups to fight excise taxes on cigarettes, as well as health studies finding a link between cancer and secondhand cigarette smoke.
Published in the peer-reviewed academic journal, Tobacco Control, the study led, 'To quarterback behind the scenes, third party efforts': the tobacco industry and the Tea Party, is not just an historical account of activities in a bygone era. As senior author, Stanton Glantz, a University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) professor of medicine, writes:
'Nonprofit organizations associated with the Tea Party have longstanding ties to tobacco companies, and continue to advocate on behalf of the tobacco industry's anti-tax, anti-regulation agenda.'
Screenshot of the archived U.S. Tea Party site, as it appeared online on Sept. 13, 2002:
The common public understanding of the origins of the Tea Party is that it is a popular grassroots uprising that began with anti-tax protests in 2009. This report might serve as a wake-up call to some people in the Tea Party itself, who would find it a little disturbing that the "grassroots" movement they are so emotionally attached to, is in fact a pawn created by billionaires and large corporations with little interest in fighting for the rights of the common person, but instead using the common person to fight for their own unfettered profits.
The implications of the UCSF Quarterback report are widespread. The main concern expressed by the authors lies in what they see happening overseas as the Tea Party movement expands internationally, training activists in 30 countries including Israel, Georgia, Japan and Serbia.
As the authors explain:
'This international expansion makes it likely that Tea Party organizations will be mounting opposition to tobacco control (and other health) policies as they have done in the USA.'
more -->>
tea baggers have always been nothing but frauds, fakes. Some of them may have felt "authentic", but the overall movement, the leadership was a fraud, with VRWC/1% $$$ making it go.
That's funny.
I went to a Tea Part rally in 2001.
anecdotal confirmation from WC.
I'm just relieved that our tax dollars that fund the National Cancer Ins ute are used for "academic studies" about the origins of the ing Tea Party instead of doing cancer research.
the grant went to a worthy applicant, no doubt.
IIRC, while they weren't under the Tea Party umbrella, I remember Boston Tea Party-themed tax protests being a thing in the '90s, tbh...
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...,4383884&hl=en
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/...ckval=GooglePM
The current Tea Party movement has its roots in a 2007 Ron Paul moneybomb... of course, it was quickly co-opted by neoconservatives and their lobbying groups/think tanks, leading to the actual grassroots being pushed out and the current "base" of ignorant racist rednecks being welcomed in, tbh...
as for the ins ution, it's free to do whatever it wants with its own money.
would you prevent it from conducting oppo for Dems under color of research, for example?
Last edited by Winehole23; 02-12-2013 at 11:37 AM.
me, I wouldn't. let em show their ass . . .
the virtuous core was hollowed out and watered down by mass participation, only the virtuous remnant, remains.
(please, please don't say RP.)
(crosses fingers, closes eyes)
I'm just relieved they have the sense and means to defend their research viability instead of bending over for rich -wads that don't have any interest in the public good.
State ins utions and nonprofits don't just get to spend their monies as they like. They either applied for a grant to fund their study, were given a donation restricted to use for the study, or used unrestricted donation monies as a defensive measure following a simple calculation that fewer taxes would equal less revenue for research.
EDIT: nice find, OP.
These "academics" know how to use Wayback Machine and Google. That's some hardcore research.
So now you're complaining they did it too expeditiously? Pick a lane, dude.
Everytime I see or hear the word Expeditious, I hear "Powder Milk Biscuits". Thanks Garrison Keillor!
So what this is saying is the Koch bro (the evil people that they are) were trying to find something to brand as Tea Party? So they secretly forced Obama to campaign on increasing the Federal debt?
Next you are going to say that because the Koch bro give to Cato, that Cato is doing their bidding
In 1993, a Philip Morris PR flack wrote a memo outlining a strategy of fighting any new taxes by joining up with other anti-tax groups to create a “New Boston Tea Party.”
The memo reads, “Grounded in the theme of ‘The New American Tax Revolution’ or ‘The New Boston Tea Party,’ the campaign activity should take the form of citizens representing the widest cons uency base mobilized with signage and other attention-drawing accoutrements such as lapel buttons, handouts, pe ions and even costumes.”
more ->>In 1990, Tim Hyde, RJR director of national field operations, outlined a strategy for RJR to create ‘a movement’ resembling what would later emerge as the Tea Party by
'build[ing] broad coalitions around the issue-cluster of freedom, choice and privacy…'
Another RJR field coordinator later described the company’s motivation for involving and organising third-party organisations:
'...—anti-tax groups were a natural. You didn’t have to defend your position on tobacco because a tax is a tax is a tax to these guys.'"
- more ->>
Last edited by Capt Bringdown; 02-12-2013 at 07:06 PM.
And it was back in 2002 during the first Bush term. All this time, I thought it was just a cover for racist birthers.
It's clear you're mad about this article... you just can't seem to articulate why
It just confirms what any impartial news watcher already knew about the Tea Party, namely that it was more astroturf than movemen.
I don't see how that proves anything. The name may have been a gimmick But the people in the town halls and protests weren't paid. But I will agree with alot of people that say they are Tea Party members to get elected(Cruz) or popularity(Trump).It's clear you're mad about this article... you just can't seem to articulate why
It just confirms what any impartial news watcher already knew about the Tea Party, namely that it was more astroturf than movemen.
Darrin dismissing without basis.
WH semicoherent drunken rambling
WC inserting his personal anecdotes as the full scope of reality.
snackster with the goods
teysha with the biscuits
Ahh the ST politico
Sigh. Those people weren't paid, they were just manipulated into supporting something the founders and financiers of the movement left purposefully vague.
Look up "astroturf teaparty 2009" (throw in " Armey" if that doesn't work) and make the effort to entertain the possible veracity of news that may contradict your preferred news sources.
No one manipulated them thinking that we are spending too much money! Did Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan manipulate people too?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
