Where Are the Tea Party Protests About Wall Street?

From the Huffington Post:

We’re down to the wire here on financial reform. I can’t think of a better time to put pressure on Wall Street and Washington to make sure there is adequate regulation to ensure that we never have another bailout. The AFL-CIO is about to have a protest at Wall Street on April 29th. Great, that makes sense. I’m sure the right-wing groups who are also upset about the bailouts will join them.

If you remember, the Tea Parties were originally formed to protest the bailouts. They were so mad at the Wall Street bankers who destroyed the economy and then took our hard earned money for their efforts.

So, they will take this opportunity, of course, to launch their own protest of Wall Street. They will protest the TARP money, the easy credit, the lack of regulation, the wild risk taking and the excessive bonuses paid with taxpayer money. They’re really going to take the fight to them.

Just kidding. They’re not going to do anything. They’re going to sit out this fight on financial reform and put absolutely no pressure on Wall Street at all. Because they are tools easily manipulated by right-wing organizations funded by corporate America.

I really feel sorry for them. They’re dupes. They think they are so fiercely independent when in fact they are the most easily manipulated people in the country. All that anger toward the power establishment and what happened? They were used by that same establishment to fight against health care reform and to try to protect the health insurance companies. Suckers.

[Read more at the Huffington Post]

12 Comments on "Where Are the Tea Party Protests About Wall Street?"

  1. Keep in mind, this is a bill that Goldman Sachs supports. See their 2009 Annual report: http://bit.ly/bhAMuc

    The big question is where will the Democratic protesters be?

  2. I'm in total agreement with this post. Where were the tea party protests about the ballooning deficit the first 6 years of the Iraq war where spending was 12B/month? Sure Obama's administration upped the ante with the TARP bailouts started by Bush but at least with the healthcare reform, money was being spent domestically for once. But I get it, these people just don't like anything to do with bigger government. It's just too big brotherish for them and it could lead to a totalitarian state where you could have government warrentless wiretapping and suspension of rights in the name of patriotism. And we can't have government interference with medical care because the private insurance companies have shown for decades how efficient and humanitarian they are giving freedom to practice medicine as doctors please.

    You know what you ignorant racist sh-theads, there's a black man in office for another 2 1/2 years so you can stay angry and have aneurisms or you can grow the hell up. Oh and all the taxes you're paying? They're lower than when Bush was in office. What's your little tea party about again?

  3. Polymorpheous | Apr 24, 2010 at 9:51 am |

    i believe the tea party started during the whole TARP/bailout.
    it was predominately libertarian and Paul supporters.
    fox news saw a 3rd party movement gaining momentum, and hijacked it.
    sadly the tea party movement is nothing like it started out as.

    • Yes. I was under that understanding also… I was in agreement with the very 1st few Tea Party gatherings (back in Fall 2007, Wikipedia says they started in Spring 2009) because it was about the Ron Paul Revolution and ending the Fed… it was about bringing America back to a place where we are in control of our money (and the printing of it) not borrowing on interest from a PRIVATE bank… and yes, just when that was gaining momentum it was highjacked by FOX News/Glen Beck (by design, I imagine). Now look at the Tea Party… They are a bunch of racist, ignorant fucks totally sidetracked from the real issue of the Federal Reserve, and the fact that multi-national globalist bankers have our economy in a strangle hold and they are squeezing tighter and tighter with debt. FOX News has done it's job perfectly to dilute a real issue with a bunch morons.

  4. Angela Broderick | Apr 25, 2010 at 3:45 pm |

    The tea party is about less government regulation, not more. Wall Street is not the problem. There would not have been any government bailout had it not been for Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Bill Clinton forcing the high risk mortgage provisions to be put in place. Learn the truth.

    • Wall Street is one of the problems…unfortunately it's the one problem with so much money that it buys both parties support…and spends plenty to keep the drum beating for “regulations are bad for business” so that nimrods buy their BS and protect their right to steal. Yeah…learn the truth. Ya might wanna try that instead of just typing it.

    • E.B. Wolf | May 23, 2010 at 10:45 pm |

      “Wall Street is not the problem.”
      Nothing happens in D.C. without a multi-million dollar lobbying effort.
      Who do you think lobbied for the bailout?

  5. dominique | Apr 25, 2010 at 4:02 pm |

    The problem here is that it is not regulation so much as as a stifling of the few honest banks 8there are a few) in the name of the greedy many and it will not prevent or stop their abuse. They are right that more government controls are useless, for it really is a question of customer input. just like the government, banks do not own their money, it is ours, it is on loan. The banks have two types of customers, depositors and borrowers, they are just the mediators. A much better solution to the problem would be to have associations of these customers mediate with the banks what they want their money to do. This would create a balance between the intersts paid to savers and those charged to the borrowers. Whatever transactions the bank would perform would then be checked by these associations, preventing exessive mouves by the bank. The savers would want to keep interest high, the borrowers low and the bank would then have to find a realistic balance and a responsible form of actions.It would be neither capitalism as in get as much as you can nor communism as in no personal initiatives. It would be communism ion the sense that people work together for the good of them all and capitalism in the sense that it will not be overseen and controled by a faceless ideology.

  6. Tea party started out good – now it's just hijacked. Doesn't mean that's gonna stop a yearn for liberty.

  7. sdadasdasdasdasdasd

  8. Smithjohnrobertjr | Aug 28, 2010 at 4:39 pm |

    Why bother to protest, the government does what it wants. NULLIFY

  9. Smithjohnrobertjr | Aug 28, 2010 at 11:39 am |

    Why bother to protest, the government does what it wants. NULLIFY

Comments are closed.