TIME (rag)agazine is fanning the flames of civil unrest, points at Tea Party as likely to revolt in Civil War

What a bunch of Progressive, usefully idiotic hacks that write for TIME.

TIME says that the Tea Party, Ron Paul among others, are likely to start a civil war.
I am rarely, if ever speechless, but when I first read this tripe, I had to seriously sit and consider my words carefully.

The author of this article, and the editors at TIME, are showing themselves to be nothing short of trash perveyors, attempting to create news.

To blatantly suggest that the Tea Party is in any way connected to Militia organizations is not only untrue, but sensationally so.

Please read this literary fecal matter, and see what you think.

( I seriously chopped up the original article to keep it under 500 words. Wouldn't want big old TIME getting offended by infringement on their property)

Go to the website here to read all the article;

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2010/10/19/will-the-federal-reserves-next-meeting-lead-to-civil-war/

From the article (empahsis added by yours truly);

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

".......What is the most likely cause today of civil unrest? Immigration. Gay Marriage. Abortion. The Results of Election Day. The Mosque at Ground Zero. Nope.

Try the Federal Reserve. November 3rd is when the Federal Reserve's next policy committee meeting ends, and if you thought this was just another boring money meeting you would be wrong. It could be the most important meeting in Fed history, maybe. The US central bank is expected to announce its next move to boost the faltering economic recovery. To say there has been considerable debate and anxiety among Fed watchers about what the central bank should do would be an understatement. Chairman Ben Bernanke has indicated in recent speeches that the central bank plans to try to drive down already low-interest rates by buying up long-term bonds. A number of people both inside the Fed and out believe this is the wrong move.

But one website seems to believe that Ben's plan might actually lead to armed conflict. Last week, the blog, Zerohedge wrote, paraphrasing a top economic forecaster David Rosenberg, that it believed the Fed's plan is not only moronic, but "positions US society one step closer to civil war if not worse."

I'm not sure what "if not worse," is supposed to mean. But, with the Tea Party gaining followers, the idea of civil war over economic issues doesn't seem that far-fetched these days. And Ron Paul definitely thinks the Fed should be ended. In TIME's recently cover story on the militia movement many said these groups are powder kegs looking for a catalyst.

So why not a Fed policy committee meeting. Still, I'm not convinced we are headed for Fedamageddon. That being said, the Fed's early November meeting is an important one. Not everyone agrees this is a good move. In fact, a number of presidents of regional Fed banks, not all of which get to vote at Fed policy meetings, have recently come out against Bernanke's plans. Some say it sets bad policy. Others think it will stoke inflation, which might be the point. Few, though, have warned of armed conflict. Here's how Zerohedge justifies its prediction of why the Fed's Nov. 3rd meeting will lead to violence:
In a very real sense, Bernanke is throwing Granny and Grandpa down the stairs - on purpose. He is literally threatening those at the lower end of the economic strata, along with all who are retired, with starvation and death, and in a just nation where the rule of law controlled instead of being abused by the kleptocrats he would be facing charges of Seditious Conspiracy, as his policies will inevitably lead to the destruction of our republic.
......So it seems clear what the Fed is likely to do. How the economy, the militias and the rest of us react is up in the air. The count down is on. T minus 15 days to Fedamageddon. See you there, hopefully....."