Phillips defended his methods with a curious argument. He disregarded the morals of his tactics, then explained that no matter what his organization says, who funds them, and how they operate, he and his corporate backers have every right to be “involved in the process.”

Second of all - I know Tim Phillips of Americans for Prosperity. I've known him over 10 years now...

State, % People Below Poverty Level
1. Mississippi 21%
2. District of Columbia 17%
3. Louisiana 17%
4. New Mexico 17%
5. Arkansas 17%
5. West Virginia 17%
7. Kentucky 17%
7. Oklahoma 15%
9. Texas 15%
10. Alabama 15%
U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2008

Top Ten States with Highest Percentage of Children under 18 Living in Poverty
Mississippi 29.4 %
Louisiana 26.9 %
District of Columbia 25.7 %
Arkansas 25.3 %
New Mexico 25.2 %
Alabama 23.6 %
Kentucky 23.6 %
West Virginia 23.4 %
Texas 23.1 %
Tennessee 22.5 %
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 American Community Survey, August 2009

Top Ten States with the Highest Percentage of Adults 65 or Older Living in Poverty
District of Columbia 15.6 %
Mississippi 15.6 %
Louisiana 14 %
Kentucky 13.4 %
New Mexico 13.2 %
Tennessee 12.9 %
Georgia 12.7 %
Arkansas 12.6 %
Alabama 12.6 %
Texas 12.3 %
U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 American Community Survey 2008

http://www.usccb.org/cchd/povertyusa/povfact4.shtml

The Census Bureau sought to find that out, for the first time, in a survey taken last year and released in September. Over all, it found that 9.9 percent of children lack any health insurance, half the rate for adults under 65.

But there was widespread variation in coverage. Children in Texas, the state with the least health insurance, are more than eight times as likely not to have it than children in Massachusetts, the state with the broadest coverage.

Those who lack health insurance now are far more likely to live in states that usually vote Republican — the states whose senators and representatives are least likely to support a law to extend coverage.

There are a number of reasons for a greater amount of health insurance in blue states. Some of those states have relatively generous child insurance programs, most notably Massachusetts, which has nine of the 10 Congressional districts with the most health insurance. (The 10th is in Hawaii, another blue state.) Some Democratic states have also been more generous in setting Medicaid coverage standards, thus providing more coverage for people with low-paying jobs that do not provide insurance.

Of the 10 Congressional districts with the least health insurance, seven are in Texas, two in California and one in Florida. Nine of those districts are largely black or Hispanic, and are represented by Democrats who faced little if any Republican opposition in the last election.

While heavily Democratic districts often have less insurance, the red states tend to have less insurance than other states even without including those districts. Of the 150 Congressional districts with the most health insurance, only three are in red states — one each in Alabama, Tennessee and Kansas. Another 25 are in purple states, with the rest in states that consistently vote Democratic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/business/economy/10charts.html

Why is it that someone who isn't even a citizen of our country cares so much about American politics?

Are Canada's politics really that boring?

How would you like it if American conservatives starting sticking their noses in your political system (not that it would ever happen, we have lives to live) and trying to influence it?

The National Citizens Coalition (NCC) was founded in 1967 by Colin M. Brown (1914-1987), initially to oppose public health care.
Harper's speech as NCC President to the Council for National Policy, a right-wing American political organization, in Montreal in June 1997 — is often cited as a testament of his true political colours.

http://www.harperindex.ca/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=0010

The National Citizens Coalition is a Canadian conservative lobby group, founded by Colin M. Brown in 1967, originally founded in opposition to the concept of a national healthcare system. It supports privatization, tax cuts, and government spending cuts and opposes laws that limit spending by non-party organizations during election campaigns. It has been heavily involved in advertising, political campaigns and legal challenges in support of its goals of "more freedom with less government."

The organization has fought to keep information about itself confidential, and opposed amendments to the Canada Elections Act that would have required third-party organizations like the NCC to publish the names of all contributors donating more than $250.

During its almost four decades of existence, the NCC has campaigned against:

* the Canada Health Act,
* the Canadian Wheat Board,
* the general strike organized by the Canadian Labour Congress against wage and price controls imposed the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau in 1975
* the admittance of Vietnamese refugees ("boat people") to Canada in 1979-1980
* closed-shop unions
* the so-called "gold-plated" pension plan for Members of Parliament
* real or perceived government waste in general

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Citizens_Coalition

The Liberal Party of Canada's government introduced Bill C-2 which became the new Canada Elections Act in 2002. Bill C-2 limited third party election advertising maximum spending to $150,000 nationwide, of which a maximum of $3,000 can be spent on a given electoral district.

Stephen Harper, then president of the National Citizens Coalition (he became Prime Minister in 2006), launched a constitutional challenge in June 2000 to Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta in Edmonton. The court held that section 350 and section 351 of the Canada Elections Act is unconstitutional. The Alberta Court of Appeal, in a 2-1 decision, ruled on December 16, 2002 that all provisions on third party activities, except for section 358, violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
[edit] Ruling

The majority was written by Justice Bastarache with Justice Iacobucci, Arbour, LeBel, Deschamps and Fish concurring.

The court found that, though the spending limits infringe upon section 2b of the Charter, the law is reasonable and is justified in light of section 1. The majority concluded that the objective of the spending limits is electoral fairness. The law has an effect in creating "a level playing field for those who wish to engage in the electoral discourse, enabling voters to be better informed". In addition, section 3 of the Charter is not infringed because the right of meaningful participation in electoral process includes the right to participate in an informed manner. Without spending limits, individuals or groups can dominate the discussion and prevent opposing views from being heard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harper_v._Canada_%28Attorney_General%29

Some folks apparently just don't get that they diss THEMSELEVES when they use that term!

You see, when a "Tea Bagging" happens, there is a Tea BaggER and a Tea BaggEE...

So let's review - if Scott Ford and the Republicans were the Tea BaggERs, then the Democrats and Martha Coakley would be... what? LOL!

If you look at the Red States, the percentage of people living in poverty is rather high, as are the number of uninsured.

Why is it that someone who isn't even a citizen of our country cares so much about American politics?
How would you like it if American conservatives starting sticking their noses in your political system (not that it would ever happen, we have lives to live) and trying to influence it?

I am sincere in asking, I have asked before and all I ever get in response is something such as "this is a Canadian website and if you don't like it blah blah blah......"

I didn't see it that way at all. Personally I thought it just had to do with the Boston Tea Party, and not anything to do with any sort of sexual denigration or.... sexual power play or anything like that.

Teabagger-2) a man that squats on top of a womens face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex, known as "teabagging"

If I understand the connotation appropriately, the Republicans seem to feel they are "teabagging" the Democrats (the Republican Tea BaggERs are lowering themselves over the Democrat Tea BaggEEsand having them suck their nads. That's what the inference there is ... right?

Things got ugly fast. Jefferson's camp accused President Adams of having a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."

In return, Adams' men called Vice President Jefferson "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/08/22/mf.campaign.slurs.slogans/index.html

An Englishman, a Canadian and an American were captured by terrorists.

The terrorist leader said: "Before we shoot you, you will be allowed last words. Please let me know what you wish to talk about."

The Englishman replied: "I wish to speak of loyalty and service to the crown."

The Canadian replied: "Since you are involved in a question of national purpose, national identity, and secession, I wish to talk about the history of constitutional process in Canada, special status, distinct society and uniqueness within diversity."

The American replied: "Just shoot me before the Canadian starts talking."

]I personally think Americans should keep their noses out of your domestic policies and vise versa, unless it has a direct influence on either one's security.

Seriously if any conservatives referred to any group of Liberals as Teabaggers or any other derogatory term there would be outrage and the poster would be banned from posting....

... who have become affiliated with the Tea Party movement to be referred to as Teabaggers...Many who are involved are merely concerned citizens.....

How would all of those Obama zealots who support Obama unquestionably as unthinking sycophantic neophytes?

I am a PROUD "Teabagger" ...

You see, when a "Tea Bagging" happens, there is a Tea BaggER and a Tea BaggEE...

Hence the need for opening one's mind to education. Some of us actually are interested in other parts of the world instead of remaining ignorant. Canada is only one health system out of many systems throughout the world, yet you don't like suggestions because they're 'foreigners' and you don't wish to learn something from them.
That's pathetic!

How would you like it if American conservatives starting sticking their noses in your political system (not that it would ever happen, we have lives to live) and trying to influence it?

Opening one's mind and becoming educated has nothing to do with staying out of something that is not their business.

but I do have problems with those from other countries trying to manipulate a system

a system that they are unfamiliar

Isn't that one of your big problems with Bush was that he tried to force the American way of thinking on "foreigners"?

Just as pathetic.

Why is it that someone who isn't even a citizen of our country cares so much about American politics?

Are Canada's politics really that boring?

How would you like it if American conservatives starting sticking their noses in your political system (not that it would ever happen, we have lives to live) and trying to influence it?

I am truly interested in why some Canadians are so hell bent on the US becoming more like them.

Politics in America is kind of like football, we usually only gain a few yards at time, and it takes many plays to get a touchdown. My "team" is

why are Liberals so quick to make disparaging remarks ab out others who dont share their political views?

How would all of those Obama zealots who support Obama unquestionably as unthinking sycophantic neophytes?

Why is that the moderators of this site let liberal kumbya singing Obama sycophants...

And Forbes is just a working stiff who "pulled himself up by the bootstraps"... Only among conservative Americans could a movement bankrolled by America's richest conservatives be considered "grassroots"...

I am so tired of Americans complaining about Canadian opinions, on a Canadian site.
You have the option of going to American sites, where only American opinions are allowed. But POF is based in Canada and welcomes the thoughts and ideas from anyone in the world with internet access.

Proved my point. Thanks.

you don't think something as simple as a few posts on a website can manipulate people's thinking?

Either you are giving the people as a whole too much credit or you aren't giving enough where you should be.

It isn't written in Canadian

This site is a dot.com not a dot.ca. I've seen posts from tons of people who didn't have a clue this was a Canadian website (until some Canadian made a statement such as yours above).

I'll educate myself on your government a bit and come on here and tell you how badly yours sucks

waste 2 or 3 hours of time doing so

see how some of you Canadians feel about someone on the outside sticking his nose in your business.

I already know how touchy some of you are.

I'll educate myself on your government a bit and come on here and tell you how badly yours sucks

I find it very sad that the only reason you would learn about Canada, is so you can insult others. Why would you not just want to learn out of curiosity?

In Of Passionate Intensity, Trevor Harrison seeks to explain the origins and subsequent electoral success of the Reform party. Employing a historical-sociological methodology, Harrison uses the case of Reform to address two fundamental questions: "Why do populist parties arise? What factors influence the ideological orientation of such parties" ? The book begins with a well-crafted discussion of populism that outlines and illustrates the often contradictory definitions found in previous work on the subject. As a partial remedy to this conceptual ambiguity, Harrison constructs an alternative theory of populism that argues "populist unrest results from delegitimation crises and the resultant decomposition of previous political alliances" . From this starting point he begins an in-depth study that traces the party's maturation through four stages: roots, rise, legitimation, and transformation. In each stage Harrison explores what he considers to be the political, economic, and social crises that propelled Reform from fringe movement to legitimate contender for political power. The result is an interesting, albeit sometimes jargon-laden, account of the party's development that neatly situates it within the larger context of Canadian political history. Although Of Passionate Intensity has much to recommend it, specifically its theory of populism, the analysis of Reform itself is somewhat less satisfying. Simply stated, Harrison does not tell us much about Reform as a political party. The impression is that of the "outsider looking in," but unsure of how important organizational capacity or internal political considerations are to explaining the party's success.

The strength of Waiting for the Wave is its analysis of the tactical and strategic political calculus that has guided Reform's efforts to become a legitimate political contender. According to Flanagan, the party's policy positions have been driven by Manning's view that populist parties sweep to power on a wave of discontent. To "keep the party afloat and paddling in the troughs between the waves," Flanagan contends, the party has employed five positioning strategies: The Party of the Right, The Party of English Canada, The Party of the West, The Party of the Hinterland, and The Party of the People . he strength of Waiting for the Wave is its analysis of the tactical and strategic political calculus that has guided Reform's efforts to become a legitimate political contender. According to Flanagan, the party's policy positions have been driven by Manning's view that populist parties sweep to power on a wave of discontent. To "keep the party afloat and paddling in the troughs between the waves," Flanagan contends, the party has employed five positioning strategies: The Party of the Right, The Party of English Canada, The Party of the West, The Party of the Hinterland, and The Party of the People. Although complete discussion of these strategies is beyond the scope of this review, even those readers only generally familiar with the party and its message will recognize aspects of all five strategies.

http://tinyurl.com/yk8s4oc

Reform had also failed in 1997 to establish itself as the clear right-wing alternative to the Liberal Party. The Progressive Conservative Party, which had been steadily rebuilt under Charest, enjoyed a modest revival in the 1997 election. It won 20 seats, up from the dismal two it had won during in the 1993 election. The split in the right-wing vote between Reform and the PCs allowed the Liberals to win a second majority government with only 40% of the vote, the combined vote of the Reform and the PCs in 1997 equalled the same amount. Political observers noted that it was a divided right which allowed the Liberals to gain a second majority government, and claimed that if the two parties did not put away their differences, the result would repeat itself.

Manning recognized the frustration by Canada's right-wing proponents and began discussions towards the launch of a new pan-Canadian party, using "United Alternative" ("UA") forums to bring grassroots Reformers together with Tories. The goal was to create a small-c conservative political alternative to the Liberals that could woo Ontarian and Atlantic Canadian voters. Manning was supported by the more right-of-centre "Focus Federally For Reform," while "Grassroots United Against Reform's Demise" ("GUARD") opposed the initiative. The United Alternative proposal created a strong debate in the Reform Party. Manning himself wrote a letter to the effect that he did not want to lead Reform anymore, but would only lead a new party. A leadership vote in 1998 managed to officially put aside the differences, with Manning winning a large majority in support of his leadership. Afterwards, Reform steadily progressed towards creating the United Alternative.

The outcome was the creation of a new party, the Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance (more commonly known as the Canadian Alliance). It fused about half of the Progressive Conservative policies, and half of Reform's policies. Reform disbanded on March 27, 2000 and was folded into the Alliance.

Even though Reform and the Alliance are considered separate parties, former Reform members dominated the new party. The Reform parliamentary caucus, with few exceptions, simply became the Alliance caucus. As a result, the Alliance was widely seen as a renamed and enlarged Reform Party. Critics of the party frequently referred to it as the "Reform Alliance" to underscore its previous incarnation as Reform, at a time when many Canadians east of Manitoba had grown uneasy about the multiple allegations of discrimination and extremism within the Reform Party as portrayed in the media.

Manning stood in the first leadership race for the new party, but lost to the younger and more charismatic Stockwell Day, the treasurer (finance minister) and deputy premier of Alberta.

The creation of the Canadian Alliance, and its eventual merger in 2003 with the Progressive Conservative Party to form the new Conservative Party of Canada, alienated some of the old Reform populists, who saw the merger as the final demise of the former Reform Party and the return of Tory indifference to western Canadian concerns. This led to the creation of a new "Reform Association of Canada". "Bring Back Real Reform" also was created by a fringe group of original Reformers from Ontario, with the aim of bringing back a federal Reform Party. Under the tag "Operation Back to the Future", it was launched in Spring 2005 as an umbrella for all original Reformers across the nation who felt that they were still without a political home. Neither of these groups has attracted any support.

Most of these people were also members of GUARD, were anti-UA, and were generally unsupportive of the Canadian Alliance, seeing it as a political vehicle for a Tory takeover even though the Alliance was dominated by former Reform Party members.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_of_Canada