Mr. Radford, can you explain how this is capitalism?
Those in support of the Library found a way to make money for their cause, got people attention with a great advertising campaign, and brought donations in to the library.
Art of CIP
Posts: 21,234
Long Beach, California, US
Robb Radford wrote:
Those in support of the Library found a way to make money for their cause, got people attention with a great advertising campaign, and brought donations in to the library.
Art of CIP
Posts: 21,234
Long Beach, California, US
SAND DIAL wrote: Michigan is not 'rolling in dough'...
heres from the page you linked to:
'Nobody even goes to the goddamn library anymore. We have the internet.
Tear the fucking thing down'
Ummm. You are aware libraries provide internet access right?
Makes sense - fire the teachers, close the libraries, make it more difficult to get a college education, dominate the media. This is how you control the masses.
Jay Edwards wrote: How is this a ''Tea Party'' story?
In that campaign, the city of Troy was unable to keep the library open without a tax increase but faced fierce opposition from the Tea Party.
But then, another group formed in favor of the issue. A social media and yard sign campaign created by Leo Burnett Detroit said there would be a book burning party three days after the election if the tax issue failed. Signs appeared around Troy with the message, “Vote to close Troy library Aug 2, book burning party Aug 5.
Jay Edwards wrote: Was the ''Tea Party'' campaigning to close the library and burn the books?
Nope. NOBODY was "campaigning" to actually do either of those things.
Jay Edwards wrote: Seems more like a deceitful ploy used on some to get a result desired by others.
Something like: The ends justify the means...
"Deceitful ploy", as in special interests manufacturing a fake "grassroots movement", calling it the "tea party", and using it on some to get a desired result by others?
SAND DIAL
Posts: 5,965
Santa Monica, California, US
This is the text at OP link:
Everyone uses the library. EVERYONE. You don't have to go to the library to use it. Everyone you deal with in life has used the library for one reason or another. Your doctor has, so has your clergyman, your attorney, your dentist, your teachers, the people who repair your car, the police officer who protects your home...they all had to use the library. And when they are providing a service to you, you are using the library too. Don't be stupid. Use your library. You'll be smarter for it.
And I listened as far as 'Librarians put up signs for Book Burning'.
the TP didnt advocate book burning, the librarians did.
SAND DIAL wrote: the TP didnt advocate book burning, the librarians did.
No one involved "advocated" ANY book burning.
*NO ACTUAL BOOK BURNING WAS TO TAKE PLACE*
This is what several people here apparently keep missing.
"book burning" was a rhetorical device, much like people throw around the term "socialism" even when no actual socialism is taking place: to elicit an emotional response and light a fire under people to take action.
Jay Edwards wrote: So, the ''Tea Party'' is involved in the context of only ''no more taxes'' and is then painted as ''book burners''.
You people are jokes but it is amusing to watch you flail about.
Look at you bawling and mewling and blubbering, all due to the Teapothead failures! Maybe next you'll grace us with your usual dopey Michael Jackson imitation...
No, NOBODY was going to burn ANY books. There were NO BOOK BURNERS HERE. NONE. *NOBODY* WAS BEING 'PAINTED' AS BOOK BURNERS, BECAUSE THERE WAS *NO* ACTUAL 'BOOK BURNING'.
Jeez, some of you just love showing us all how incredibly dense you are...
kickfight wrote: Look at you bawling and mewling and blubbering, all due to the Teapothead failures!
Ultimately the failure is not that of the tea party members but that of the ignorant masses more than willing to steal money through taxation for the benefit of another. To add insult to injury, the city could probably purchase a computer and an internet connection for the minority of people that still use the facility. I'd be willing to wager the tax increase was to pay for the bloated pensions.
kickfight wrote: Look at you bawling and mewling and blubbering, all due to the Teapothead failures!
OMarkcompa wrote: Ultimately the failure is not that of the tea party members but that of the ignorant masses more than willing to steal money through taxation for the benefit of another.
The dullwitted teapotheads' only interest is clinging to their filthy money by single-minded adherence to anti-taxation dogma. But they're delusional and myopic aside from being utter failures. Anyone who holds any money is no less of a thief than any other, so their ill-gotten gains might as well be put to work towards the public good.
OMarkcompa wrote: To add insult to injury, the city could probably purchase a computer and an internet connection for the minority of people that still use the facility. I'd be willing to wager the tax increase was to pay for the bloated pensions.
Even in such a simplistic, reductionist mindset, the computer and internet connection would still cost money. And simple-minded teapotheads would give themselves a hernia braying about THAT as well. Selfish tools are still selfish tools, regardless of the size of the expense needed to serve the public good.
kickfight wrote: Anyone who holds any money is no less of a thief than any other,
Say what?
kickfight wrote: Even in such a simplistic, reductionist mindset, the computer and internet connection would still cost money. And simple-minded teapotheads would give themselves a hernia braying about THAT as well. Selfish tools are still selfish tools, regardless of the size of the expense needed to serve the public good.
kickfight wrote: Anyone who holds any money is no less of a thief than any other,
OMarkcompa wrote: Say what?
Missed it the first time? Read it again, then.
kickfight wrote: Even in such a simplistic, reductionist mindset, the computer and internet connection would still cost money. And simple-minded teapotheads would give themselves a hernia braying about THAT as well. Selfish tools are still selfish tools, regardless of the size of the expense needed to serve the public good.
OMarkcompa wrote: Not surprisingly you miss the point.
| 
| 
| edu