# Are all people in the Tea Party stupid are just the ones they put on TV



## Megatron

Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?


----------



## uscitizen

Yes.

You know if you keep up that realistic attitude you will never make in in politics.


----------



## Dr.House

It kind of loses the punch when you call someone stupid while fucking up the thread title...


----------



## uscitizen

Ahh 2 TV characters so far.


Megatron vs House!


----------



## Mad Scientist

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?


I'm sure Christine, Sarah and Michelle have bright futures. Just look how far "Slow Joe" Biden has come with *his* limited intelligence value.


----------



## McDowell's

uscitizen said:


> Ahh 2 TV characters so far.
> 
> 
> Megatron vs House!



Metrosexual Megatron vs Hockey House

The plot thickens..


----------



## bucs90

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



"are" just the ones....

"or" just the ones....

Way to make an ass of yourself while calling someone else stupid.


----------



## uscitizen

Mad Scientist said:


> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure Christine, Sarah and Michelle have bright futures. Just look how far "Slow Joe" Biden has come with *his* limited intelligence value.
Click to expand...


come on now you can do better than that they are just as bad as we are stuff.


----------



## Megatron

McDowell's said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh 2 TV characters so far.
> 
> 
> Megatron vs House!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Metrosexual Megatron vs Hockey House
> 
> The plot thickens..
Click to expand...


There is nothing metrosexual about having a gun for an arm my friend, nothing at all!


----------



## McDowell's

Megatron said:


> McDowell's said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh 2 TV characters so far.
> 
> 
> Megatron vs House!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Metrosexual Megatron vs Hockey House
> 
> The plot thickens..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is nothing metrosexual about having a gun for an arm my friend, nothing at all!
Click to expand...


True. However, a robot which appears to be pimpin skinny jeans is metrosexual - no matter how many gun arms he has.


----------



## Megatron

McDowell's said:


> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> McDowell's said:
> 
> 
> 
> Metrosexual Megatron vs Hockey House
> 
> The plot thickens..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing metrosexual about having a gun for an arm my friend, nothing at all!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> True. However, a robot which appears to be pimpin skinny jeans is metrosexual - no matter how many gun arms he has.
Click to expand...


That's armor son, it's got to be close to the skin for protection against dogs and lasers


----------



## McDowell's

Megatron said:


> McDowell's said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing metrosexual about having a gun for an arm my friend, nothing at all!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True. However, a robot which appears to be pimpin skinny jeans is metrosexual - no matter how many gun arms he has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's armor son, it's got to be close to the skin for protection against dogs and lasers
Click to expand...


First, the terminator movies lied; dogs love robots and refuse to attack them. Second, denim is not very resilient against lasers. Third, how do your balls o' steel fit in there?


----------



## Avatar4321

Megatron used to be so cool. Now he really is weak. It's a shame.

Now this is a good version of Megatron:


"Thundercracker a rocket pack out of your ass and give it to Optimus Prime"

best line ever.


----------



## bucs90

It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.


----------



## Wry Catcher

bucs90 said:


> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.



Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.


----------



## bucs90

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
Click to expand...


And affirmative action is NOT based on emotion, greed, hate, fear, and pleasing a flock? Same with healthcare (fear, emotion, greed, flock). Open borders (emotion, greed, flock). No torture (fear, emotion).

Nearly every single left wing ideal is based on fear of something, hate of something that another has, greed in wanting what someone else has, or emotion of wanting to feel good about something they can truly have little effect on either way.

Looking at left wing ideals in far left full bloom should bring fear: USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Nazi party. Full bloom, total government control over people is frightening. Yes, we fear it. 

If wanting to have the right, and keep the right, to keep what we earn, and spend it how we want to spend it, is "greed", well, call me greedy.

If not wanting my country flooded with illegals is "hate", well, yeah, I hate open borders, as does the entire world, which is full of countries that enforce their borders while scolding us for attempting to secure ours.


----------



## Wry Catcher

bucs90 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And affirmative action is NOT based on emotion, greed, hate, fear, and pleasing a flock? Same with healthcare (fear, emotion, greed, flock). Open borders (emotion, greed, flock). No torture (fear, emotion).
> 
> Nearly every single left wing ideal is based on fear of something, hate of something that another has, greed in wanting what someone else has, or emotion of wanting to feel good about something they can truly have little effect on either way.
> 
> Looking at left wing ideals in far left full bloom should bring fear: USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Nazi party. Full bloom, total government control over people is frightening. Yes, we fear it.
> 
> If wanting to have the right, and keep the right, to keep what we earn, and spend it how we want to spend it, is "greed", well, call me greedy.
> 
> If not wanting my country flooded with illegals is "hate", well, yeah, I hate open borders, as does the entire world, which is full of countries that enforce their borders while scolding us for attempting to secure ours.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry.  What are the left wing ideals?  Frankly, the left wing is rarely represented on this message board.
Support for equal rights for all people is not 'left wing'; supporting a progressive income tax is not left wing, and supporting social security is not left wing.  Support for Medicare is not left wing and support for expanding Medicare with a public option is not left wing either.  Supporting reasonable controls on who can own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm is not left wing, nor is support for labor unions, clean air, clean water and a respect for our environment.


----------



## bucs90

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And affirmative action is NOT based on emotion, greed, hate, fear, and pleasing a flock? Same with healthcare (fear, emotion, greed, flock). Open borders (emotion, greed, flock). No torture (fear, emotion).
> 
> Nearly every single left wing ideal is based on fear of something, hate of something that another has, greed in wanting what someone else has, or emotion of wanting to feel good about something they can truly have little effect on either way.
> 
> Looking at left wing ideals in far left full bloom should bring fear: USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Nazi party. Full bloom, total government control over people is frightening. Yes, we fear it.
> 
> If wanting to have the right, and keep the right, to keep what we earn, and spend it how we want to spend it, is "greed", well, call me greedy.
> 
> If not wanting my country flooded with illegals is "hate", well, yeah, I hate open borders, as does the entire world, which is full of countries that enforce their borders while scolding us for attempting to secure ours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry.  What are the left wing ideals?  Frankly, the left wing is rarely represented on this message board.
> Support for equal rights for all people is not 'left wing'; supporting a progressive income tax is not left wing, and supporting social security is not left wing.  Support for Medicare is not left wing and support for expanding Medicare with a public option is not left wing either.  Supporting reasonable controls on who can own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm is not left wing, nor is support for labor unions, clean air, clean water and a respect for our environment.
Click to expand...


Today is not opposite day.

Everything you described above involves larger government, more expensive government, more CONTROL over the people, and all to be done only with more money taken from private citizens to fund it all. Those are left wing ideals. It's a simple scheme. Left wing is bigger government, more control, right wing is less government, more freedom. We're constantly in a battle to move either way. Neither DEM or GOP is exclusive to either side, as some sway both ways. But thats the general scope of ideology, along with the middle who share both views.


----------



## chanel

Are all the people who bash the Tea Party stupid, or just the ones they put on the internet?

We have a tea party forum.  Tea Party - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## Wry Catcher

bucs90 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And affirmative action is NOT based on emotion, greed, hate, fear, and pleasing a flock? Same with healthcare (fear, emotion, greed, flock). Open borders (emotion, greed, flock). No torture (fear, emotion).
> 
> Nearly every single left wing ideal is based on fear of something, hate of something that another has, greed in wanting what someone else has, or emotion of wanting to feel good about something they can truly have little effect on either way.
> 
> Looking at left wing ideals in far left full bloom should bring fear: USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Nazi party. Full bloom, total government control over people is frightening. Yes, we fear it.
> 
> If wanting to have the right, and keep the right, to keep what we earn, and spend it how we want to spend it, is "greed", well, call me greedy.
> 
> If not wanting my country flooded with illegals is "hate", well, yeah, I hate open borders, as does the entire world, which is full of countries that enforce their borders while scolding us for attempting to secure ours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry.  What are the left wing ideals?  Frankly, the left wing is rarely represented on this message board.
> Support for equal rights for all people is not 'left wing'; supporting a progressive income tax is not left wing, and supporting social security is not left wing.  Support for Medicare is not left wing and support for expanding Medicare with a public option is not left wing either.  Supporting reasonable controls on who can own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm is not left wing, nor is support for labor unions, clean air, clean water and a respect for our environment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Today is not opposite day.
> 
> Everything you described above involves larger government, more expensive government, more CONTROL over the people, and all to be done only with more money taken from private citizens to fund it all. Those are left wing ideals. It's a simple scheme. Left wing is bigger government, more control, right wing is less government, more freedom. We're constantly in a battle to move either way. Neither DEM or GOP is exclusive to either side, as some sway both ways. But thats the general scope of ideology, along with the middle who share both views.
Click to expand...


Very little of what I described involves larger government, all of what I posted already exists, even a public option.  Those who are not insured get treated when ill or injured, don't they?
I'm not for expanding the size of the Federal Government; I am for making the government more efficient and effective.


----------



## bucs90

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry.  What are the left wing ideals?  Frankly, the left wing is rarely represented on this message board.
> Support for equal rights for all people is not 'left wing'; supporting a progressive income tax is not left wing, and supporting social security is not left wing.  Support for Medicare is not left wing and support for expanding Medicare with a public option is not left wing either.  Supporting reasonable controls on who can own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm is not left wing, nor is support for labor unions, clean air, clean water and a respect for our environment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today is not opposite day.
> 
> Everything you described above involves larger government, more expensive government, more CONTROL over the people, and all to be done only with more money taken from private citizens to fund it all. Those are left wing ideals. It's a simple scheme. Left wing is bigger government, more control, right wing is less government, more freedom. We're constantly in a battle to move either way. Neither DEM or GOP is exclusive to either side, as some sway both ways. But thats the general scope of ideology, along with the middle who share both views.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Very little of what I described involves larger government, all of what I posted already exists, even a public option.  Those who are not insured get treated when ill or injured, don't they?
> I'm not for expanding the size of the Federal Government; I am for making the government more efficient and effective.
Click to expand...


Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid do not involve or require a big government?

Gun control requires enforcement, which means big, armed government. 

In order to SUSTAIN what is already in place (because it's going broke and taking us with it) is going to require taking more money from the citizens, which will require obviously more IRS agents(which we just hired a lot of), more gov't offices, etc, etc.

And yes, those who are hurt or ill do get treated. Which is why we did not need Obamacare. But the left wing wants single payer. Meaning the government is the sole payer of healthcare costs for all citizens. One stop healthcare shopping. The government. Obviously a massive undertaking by the gov't, similar to European models. Which, btw, are also going bankrupt.

Sad truth is government is rarely efficient OR effective. Partly because government has no competition. Locals can't make a competitive choice of who they want to be governed by. They have their city, state, and federal government. It's not like they can choose Kmart or Wal-Mart. Vote, yes.  But politicians don't make government run. Line level government employees do. Clerks. Office employees. The "boots on the ground". And those folks are not elected, and can almost never be fired. Without competition, those folks don't have to be effective or efficient, but simply do the minimum to get by. Which is why government is never efficient. DMV, public schools, etc, etc, all government is run down by waste, inefficiency, fraud, corruption. Which is why we need to give the gov't less, not more, power.


----------



## editec

> *Are all people in the Tea Party stupid are just the ones they put on TV *


 
*Whenever a crowd is on a likeminded mission it tends to bring out the stupid in some people.*

*Mob behavior is the worse example of that.  That's when the stupid ends up infecting pretty much everybody in the crowd *

*And people acting out to extremes when they imagine that those surrrounding them will approve, is another, abeit a lesser example of that behavior.*

*This happens regardless of what the crowd is all about politically...I saw plenty of that kind of stupid acting out behavior in the anti-war demonstrations of the 60s and 70s'.*


----------



## Mad Scientist

uscitizen said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure Christine, Sarah and Michelle have bright futures. Just look how far "Slow Joe" Biden has come with *his* limited intelligence value.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> come on now you can do better than that they are just as bad as we are stuff.
Click to expand...

I think Joe is a moron, now he's Veep. You think Christine, Sarah and Michelle are morons.
Obama is shaping up to be Jimmy Carter II. Anything could happen in 2012.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



Compared to who Obama? Who like most liberals wouldn't know the truth if it bit them in the ass.


----------



## daveman

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
Click to expand...

"Hope."  "Change."  "Yes We Can!"


----------



## whitehall

More hate speech against republican women. What is it with you sissies on the left?


----------



## Wry Catcher

daveman said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Hope."  "Change."  "Yes We Can!"
Click to expand...


Hope and change are not solutions, dave.  "Take our country back" "Second Amendment remedies" are not solutions either, but they do suggest something more, something violent which hope and change do not.


----------



## Avatar4321

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
Click to expand...


What exactly is complex about overspending, too much debt, and taxes being too high?


----------



## Avatar4321

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry.  What are the left wing ideals?  Frankly, the left wing is rarely represented on this message board.
> Support for equal rights for all people is not 'left wing'; supporting a progressive income tax is not left wing, and supporting social security is not left wing.  Support for Medicare is not left wing and support for expanding Medicare with a public option is not left wing either.  Supporting reasonable controls on who can own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm is not left wing, nor is support for labor unions, clean air, clean water and a respect for our environment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today is not opposite day.
> 
> Everything you described above involves larger government, more expensive government, more CONTROL over the people, and all to be done only with more money taken from private citizens to fund it all. Those are left wing ideals. It's a simple scheme. Left wing is bigger government, more control, right wing is less government, more freedom. We're constantly in a battle to move either way. Neither DEM or GOP is exclusive to either side, as some sway both ways. But thats the general scope of ideology, along with the middle who share both views.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Very little of what I described involves larger government, all of what I posted already exists, even a public option.  Those who are not insured get treated when ill or injured, don't they?
> I'm not for expanding the size of the Federal Government; I am for making the government more efficient and effective.
Click to expand...


Name a single issue you've supported less government intrusion on.


----------



## Jarhead

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek *simple solutions to complex issues*. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they *appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear* - of the flock.
Click to expand...


"My first move will be to close GITMO".....(simple solution to complex issues)

"I will start pulling out of Iraq in 6 months"....(simple solutions to complex issues)

"we will try the terorrists as civilians in a NYC court...(simple solutions to complex issues)

"The worst economy since the great depression"....(appeal to the emotion of fear)

"I will give 95% of you more money in your paycheck"...(appeal to emotion of greed)

"The GOP is the party of No and they only care about the rich"...(appeal to the emotion of hate)

"The police acted stupidly"....(appeal to the emotion of hate)

"a doctor may prefer to take out your childs tonsils for the better reimbursement...(appeal to the emotion of hate AND fear)

Seems Obama is a built in the tea party image according to your assessment.


----------



## Jarhead

whitehall said:


> More hate speech against republican women. What is it with you sissies on the left?



Hate what you fear.


----------



## AquaAthena

Dr.House said:


> It kind of loses the punch when you call someone stupid while fucking up the thread title...



Yes, it tells us much more about the messenger than the message...


----------



## uscitizen

I would think that the Tea Party would put their best and brightest on TV for all to see.


----------



## daveman

Wry Catcher said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
> 
> 
> 
> "Hope."  "Change."  "Yes We Can!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hope and change are not solutions, dave.  "Take our country back" "Second Amendment remedies" are not solutions either, but they do suggest something more, something violent which hope and change do not.
Click to expand...


Hope and change are vacuous emotional appeals.  And that's all Obama offered.  True story.


----------



## Two Thumbs

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



Palin backed 18 candidates, 16 got elected.

so that means you're talking out your ass.


----------



## Two Thumbs

Megatron said:


> McDowell's said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh 2 TV characters so far.
> 
> 
> Megatron vs House!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Metrosexual Megatron vs Hockey House
> 
> The plot thickens..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is nothing metrosexual about having a gun for an arm my friend, nothing at all!
Click to expand...


It's a giant penis on your arm.

so yes, metrosexual was incorrect, he shoulda gone with


----------



## Wry Catcher

Avatar4321 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What exactly is complex about overspending, too much debt, and taxes being too high?
Click to expand...


Nothing other than the simplicity of your post.  How much debt is too much?  How high should taxes be, and what should those taxes provide?  
What are the consequences of laying off tens of thousands of government employees?  How many more homes will go to foreclosure?  How many more Americans will become homeless?  How many small businesses will fail as a result of more Americans becoming unemployed? 
Simple solutions to complex problems and an inability or unwillingness to consider the consequences intended and otherwise is the bane of TPers.

Ignore the human cost and really think about this one point.
Providing medicare to all Americans paid by taxes, providing preventative health care, health care education and treatment for Alcohol/Drug/Tobacco makes sense.  Prevention is cost effective, early detection is cost effective, and a healtier work force is more productive.


----------



## mdn2000

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
Click to expand...


We do not seek simple solutions, we have simple solutions, big difference. Further, the issues are not complex, at least not to us. What appears to Liberal's as complex, is rather simple to those of us with common sense. 

Of course the Liberal policy of Global Warming and Energy does not rely on fear, how is that. The Liberal is using fear, I do not think I see many posts or opinions coming from the Liberals that are not using fear.

Here for instance, you use fear, Michelle Bachmann who is an actual elected leader vs. Palin you fear will be elected, you offer not a reasoned argument, but an agument that instills fear, I mean my God, imagine the type of people who only do things out of hate, fear, and greed, we must elect the Liberals to protect us from such people. 

Seems real simple to me that you are doing what you accuse Palin and Bachmann of doing, using fear. Of course its much more complex than that, correct. 

Energy is complex right.

Reducing the size of government is complex.

I say we quit electing Democrats or Republicans that find these problems too complex to fix. We have had the same Liberals in Washington for 40 years, what complex problem have they solved in that time.


----------



## kiwiman127

The Tea Party is way too right wing to be to the point of being extreme.  And Palin, Bachmann just don't present themselves as being on top of history, facts and the issues. They'd be better off having Jim DeMint, Ron or Rand Paul do their talking for them.  It's not that I'm a sexist, it's just that Palin and Bachmann don't do the job of attracting an over all positive image of the Tea Party. Plus I  agree with Rand Paul regarding aid to Israel.

*Time to end foreign aid to Israel: &#8216;We just can&#8217;t do it anymore,&#8217; Sen. Paul warns*

Time to end foreign aid to Israel: &#8216;We just can&#8217;t do it anymore,&#8217; Sen. Paul warns | Raw Story


----------



## blastoff

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



*Are all people in the Tea Party stupid are just the ones they put on TV*

When it comes to stupid it applies to all of society, a certain percentage of which are stupid regardless of affiliations they might have.  Some are likely in the Tea Party just as some start threads in this forum.


----------



## Provocateur

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



Woman hater, huh?  

Did your mother abuse you in your youth?


----------



## Provocateur

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
Click to expand...


Flock?  Quick, tell me what "Change" Obama was referring to in his catchy campaign slogan.

Three words were enough for the left.  

Thankfully a lot of moderates, and some now ex-Democrats came to their senses in November.

Did you know that record numbers of Democrats are fleeing that Party?  


Record Numbers.


----------



## Defiant1

Megatron said:


> McDowell's said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh 2 TV characters so far.
> 
> 
> Megatron vs House!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Metrosexual Megatron vs Hockey House
> 
> The plot thickens..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is nothing metrosexual about having a gun for an arm my friend, nothing at all!
Click to expand...


Unless it only shoots blanks....


----------



## AquaAthena

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



Actually the Tea Party is a powerful force that gave President Obama a ( in his own word ) *"shallacking"* on November 2nd, 2010! !!!


----------



## The Infidel

Wry Catcher said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the message is clear; TP members seek simple solutions to complex issues. TP 'leaders' such as Palin, Bachmann and Angle rarely offer reasoned arguments, they appeal to the emotions - greed, hate, fear - of the flock.
Click to expand...


Admit it.... you libtards are skeered of them womenz and ya know it!

Ya bunch of panty munching pussies


----------



## The Infidel

AquaAthena said:


> Actually the Tea Party is a powerful force that gave President Obama a ( in his own word ) *"shallacking"* on November 2nd, 2010! !!!





They spanked dat ass!


----------



## Intense

Maybe it's about peeling one layer at a time. I think the key is looking for solutions rather than excuses to our very real problems. Regardless of Party, action needs to be taken, appropriate action. Sometimes a scalpel is needed, sometimes a chain saw. Let circumstance dictate, through honest reason and debate, it is time to get past the teleprompter's telling us what Big Brother thinks we should hear, while doing the opposite. We need to break through the filtering, through the misinformation, if we are going to effect change in a positive way. Bailing out the Oppressors is not a viable solution, it's effect is to encourage them to do more of the same, on our dime. The Tea Party is a voice, just like those around it, on both sides of the Aisle. It's done no worse than what some here defend. The balance between Individual Liberty, and the good of the Community is not easy to maintain, no matter which side you are coming from.


----------



## Rambunctious

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



The Tea Party is the future bud.....live it, love it, learn it!
Better get on board.


----------



## Megatron

Rambunctious said:


> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party is the future bud.....live it, love it, learn it!
> Better get on board.
Click to expand...


The future of what? More funny SNL sketches? You can't really think that the tea party will ever win an office in any district with a sizable population.


----------



## Avatar4321

uscitizen said:


> I would think that the Tea Party would put their best and brightest on TV for all to see.



Two problems with your thinking here:

1) The tea party is a loose association. No one person controls it. Thus no one is putting anyone out there for all to see.

2) The Tea Party believes in freedom of speech and encourages everyone to speak out in the capacity they can for the Constitution and the ideals of sound fiscal government.


----------



## Avatar4321

Megatron said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party is the future bud.....live it, love it, learn it!
> Better get on board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The future of what? More funny SNL sketches? You can't really think that the tea party will ever win an office in any district with a sizable population.
Click to expand...


Not paying much attention to the 2010 election results eh?


----------



## Megatron

Avatar4321 said:


> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party is the future bud.....live it, love it, learn it!
> Better get on board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The future of what? More funny SNL sketches? You can't really think that the tea party will ever win an office in any district with a sizable population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not paying much attention to the 2010 election results eh?[/QUOTE
> 
> All the tea party is doing is making it easier for Dems to win seats. How many senate seats did the Rep lose because of the TP
Click to expand...


----------



## uscitizen

Beck and Palin seem to pretty much control the Tea Party.


----------



## Megatron

uscitizen said:


> Beck and Palin seem to pretty much control the Tea Party.



Glen Beck is a pussy


----------



## Dr.House

uscitizen said:


> Beck and Palin seem to pretty much control the Tea Party.



Most idiots agree with you....


----------



## uscitizen

Megatron said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beck and Palin seem to pretty much control the Tea Party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Glen Beck is a pussy
Click to expand...


Of course, but the TP loves him.

He is very wussy though.  Pretty funny that people actually take him seriously.


----------



## uscitizen

Dr.House said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beck and Palin seem to pretty much control the Tea Party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most idiots agree with you....
Click to expand...


That is what I just said.


----------



## Dr.House

uscitizen said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beck and Palin seem to pretty much control the Tea Party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most idiots agree with you....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is what I just said.
Click to expand...


Not really, but it's cute you think so....


----------



## Megatron

Dr.House said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most idiots agree with you....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is what I just said.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not really, but it's cute you think so....
Click to expand...


So who controls the tea party if not emo beck and pretty palin


----------



## grunt11b

Dr.House said:


> It kind of loses the punch when you call someone stupid while fucking up the thread title...



HAHAHAHAHAH!! I love it.


----------



## grunt11b

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine O&#8217;Donnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, What&#8217;s up with that?



This is all you need to know. Also, I noticed you have optimus prime as your avatar, I am assuming you are either only 5 years old or the mental equivalent that we all call liberal. 
 For everyone else, enjoys the hotties of the right!!! We gottem, they dont! 


Dailymotion - Conservative women vs. Liberal women - a News & Politics video

 Another one.

 [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xIOLgnnwbw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xIOLgnnwbw[/ame]


----------



## Megatron

When you try to make serious points in a joke post you make yourself look really stupid, I am just saying


----------



## taichiliberal

The latest empty gesture by the freshman GOP Congressmen comes in the form of rejection of the health section of their Congressional benefits package (being that they wailed like stuck pigs against the Healthcare reform law that is similar in some aspects healthcare offered to the Congressmen and Senators)

17 Congressmen have been embarassed by liberal activists groups to refuse the healthcare portions of their benefits package.  The most notable is Rep. Walsh (R-ILL), who claims that since his wife has pre-condition, she will be rejected by most insurance companies....but Walsh claims that he made a commitment to the tea bag party ideology, so his family will struggle on!  

Give me a fucking break.....Walsh was a venture capitalist and is still on the advisory board of his old firm.  So combine that salary with his Congressman one......he can jolly well afford to pay for his wife's healthcare.

And the other 16 Congressmen already have insurance that takes cares of their needs.

So once again, you teabagger/oather/birther/neocon/Libertarians.....you've been played for SUCKERS!


----------



## uscitizen

A bunch of drama queens.
It sells well to their crowd though.


----------



## Oddball

So, they accept the benefits and they're hypocrites, yet if they refuse them it's an  empty gesture.

Like we needed more evidence that no matter what you do, it'll never be enough to please the spoiled little brat children of the American left.


----------



## California Girl

Oddball said:


> So, they accept the benefits and they're hypocrites, yet if they refuse them it's an  empty gesture.
> 
> Like we needed more evidence that no matter what you do, it'll never be enough to please the spoiled little brat children of the American left.



Ignore it. It's just the 'oh fuck, what can we whine about now' brigade. Sad bastards.


----------



## mdn2000

taichiliberal said:


> The latest empty gesture by the freshman GOP Congressmen comes in the form of rejection of the health section of their Congressional benefits package (being that they wailed like stuck pigs against the Healthcare reform law that is similar in some aspects healthcare offered to the Congressmen and Senators)
> 
> 17 Congressmen have been embarassed by liberal activists groups to refuse the healthcare portions of their benefits package.  The most notable is Rep. Walsh (R-ILL), who claims that since his wife has pre-condition, she will be rejected by most insurance companies....but Walsh claims that he made a commitment to the tea bag party ideology, so his family will struggle on!
> 
> Give me a fucking break.....Walsh was a venture capitalist and is still on the advisory board of his old firm.  So combine that salary with his Congressman one......he can jolly well afford to pay for his wife's healthcare.
> 
> And the other 16 Congressmen already have insurance that takes cares of their needs.
> 
> So once again, you teabagger/oather/birther/neocon/Libertarians.....you've been played for SUCKERS!



Speaking of tea bag suckers, you want extra salt with yours?


----------



## taichiliberal

mdn2000 said:


> taichiliberal said:
> 
> 
> 
> The latest empty gesture by the freshman GOP Congressmen comes in the form of rejection of the health section of their Congressional benefits package (being that they wailed like stuck pigs against the Healthcare reform law that is similar in some aspects healthcare offered to the Congressmen and Senators)
> 
> 17 Congressmen have been embarassed by liberal activists groups to refuse the healthcare portions of their benefits package.  The most notable is Rep. Walsh (R-ILL), who claims that since his wife has pre-condition, she will be rejected by most insurance companies....but Walsh claims that he made a commitment to the tea bag party ideology, so his family will struggle on!
> 
> Give me a fucking break.....Walsh was a venture capitalist and is still on the advisory board of his old firm.  So combine that salary with his Congressman one......he can jolly well afford to pay for his wife's healthcare.
> 
> And the other 16 Congressmen already have insurance that takes cares of their needs.
> 
> So once again, you teabagger/oather/birther/neocon/Libertarians.....you've been played for SUCKERS!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of tea bag suckers, you want extra salt with yours?
Click to expand...


Translation:  yet another teabagger who can't come to grips with the FACTS that his "leadership" has played him for a FOOL!


----------



## Dante

taichiliberal said:


> The latest empty gesture by the freshman GOP Congressmen comes in the form of rejection of the health section of their Congressional benefits package (being that they wailed like stuck pigs against the Healthcare reform law that is similar in some aspects healthcare offered to the Congressmen and Senators)
> 
> 17 Congressmen have been embarassed by liberal activists groups to refuse the healthcare portions of their benefits package.  The most notable is Rep. Walsh (R-ILL), who claims that since his wife has pre-condition, she will be rejected by most insurance companies....but Walsh claims that he made a commitment to the tea bag party ideology, so his family will struggle on!
> 
> Give me a fucking break.....Walsh was a venture capitalist and is still on the advisory board of his old firm.  So combine that salary with his Congressman one......he can jolly well afford to pay for his wife's healthcare.
> 
> And the other 16 Congressmen already have insurance that takes cares of their needs.
> 
> So once again, you teabagger/oather/birther/neocon/Libertarians.....you've been played for SUCKERS!



thanks


----------



## Dante

Oddball said:


> So, they accept the benefits and they're hypocrites, yet if they refuse them it's an  empty gesture.
> 
> Like we needed more evidence that no matter what you do, it'll never be enough to please the spoiled little brat children of the American left.



wow! threw your faux principles away in a few simple sentences.

my hat is off to you here


----------



## taichiliberal

Oddball said:


> So, they accept the benefits and they're hypocrites, yet if they refuse them it's an  empty gesture.
> 
> 
> Like we needed more evidence that no matter what you do, it'll never be enough to please the spoiled little brat children of the American left.





Let me dumb it down for you, Oddball.....Walsh turning down the health care benefits given to congressmen IS AN EMPTY GESTURE ON HIS PART, AS HIS FINANCIAL SITUATION VIA HIS ADVISOR STATUS AT HIS OLD JOB MORE THAN COMPENSATES FOR THE LACK OF INSURANCE THAT WOULD COVER HIS WIFE'S PRE-EXISTING CONDITION.  And the other teabagger friendly GOP'ers all have private insurance that they can afford that meets their needs.

The average working family, middle, lower, and working poor, DO NOT HAVE FINANCIAL OPTIONS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE DENIALS OF PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS UNDER THE OLD INSURANCE COMPANIES...which is what the teabagger/neocon GOP so desperately want to maintain.

Don't get pissed at me, bunky.....it's YOUR teabagger/neocon leadership that are playing YOU for suckers.


----------



## Oddball

Grow up, you petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.


----------



## taichiliberal

California Girl said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, they accept the benefits and they're hypocrites, yet if they refuse them it's an  empty gesture.
> 
> Like we needed more evidence that no matter what you do, it'll never be enough to please the spoiled little brat children of the American left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignore it. It's just the 'oh fuck, what can we whine about now' brigade. Sad bastards.
Click to expand...


Let me dumb it down for you, you mentally challenged California Girl.....Walsh turning down the health care benefits given to congressmen IS AN EMPTY GESTURE ON HIS PART, AS HIS FINANCIAL SITUATION VIA HIS ADVISOR STATUS AT HIS OLD JOB MORE THAN COMPENSATES FOR THE LACK OF INSURANCE THAT WOULD COVER HIS WIFE'S PRE-EXISTING CONDITION. And the other teabagger friendly GOP'ers all have private insurance that they can afford that meets their needs.

The average working family, middle, lower, and working poor, DO NOT HAVE FINANCIAL OPTIONS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE DENIALS OF PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS UNDER THE OLD INSURANCE COMPANIES...which is what the teabagger/neocon GOP so desperately want to maintain.

Don't get pissed at me, bunky.....it's YOUR teabagger/neocon leadership that are playing YOU for suckers.


----------



## taichiliberal

Oddball said:


> Grow up, you petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.



See folks, THIS is what the neocon GOP depends on......proudly ignorant parrots like Oddball who cannot deal with the FACTS when they contradict his beliefs.  All folk like Oddball can do is cover their ears and stick out their tongues....and then stand around waiting for the people who screwed them over to tell them whom else to blame.  

What a bunch of birther/oather/teabagger/neocon/Libertarian SUCKERS!


----------



## DiveCon

taichiliberal said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Grow up, you petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See folks, THIS is what the neocon GOP depends on......proudly ignorant parrots like Oddball who cannot deal with the FACTS when they contradict his beliefs.  All folk like Oddball can do is cover their ears and stick out their tongues....and then stand around waiting for the people who screwed them over to tell them whom else to blame.
> 
> What a bunch of birther/oather/teabagger/neocon/Libertarian SUCKERS!
Click to expand...


oddball a neocon
LOL


----------



## Oddball

taichiliberal said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Grow up, you petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See folks, THIS is what the neocon GOP depends on......proudly ignorant parrots like Oddball who cannot deal with the FACTS when they contradict his beliefs.  All folk like Oddball can do is cover their ears and stick out their tongues....and then stand around waiting for the people who screwed them over to tell them whom else to blame.
> 
> What a bunch of birther/oather/teabagger/neocon/Libertarian SUCKERS!
Click to expand...

I'm not a republican, you foolish, petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.


----------



## DiveCon

Oddball said:


> taichiliberal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Grow up, you petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See folks, THIS is what the neocon GOP depends on......proudly ignorant parrots like Oddball who cannot deal with the FACTS when they contradict his beliefs.  All folk like Oddball can do is cover their ears and stick out their tongues....and then stand around waiting for the people who screwed them over to tell them whom else to blame.
> 
> What a bunch of birther/oather/teabagger/neocon/Libertarian SUCKERS!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not a republican, you foolish, petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.
Click to expand...

you, you, you NEOCON

LOL


----------



## taichiliberal

Oddball said:


> taichiliberal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Grow up, you petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See folks, THIS is what the neocon GOP depends on......proudly ignorant parrots like Oddball who cannot deal with the FACTS when they contradict his beliefs.  All folk like Oddball can do is cover their ears and stick out their tongues....and then stand around waiting for the people who screwed them over to tell them whom else to blame.
> 
> What a bunch of birther/oather/teabagger/neocon/Libertarian SUCKERS!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not a republican, you foolish, petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child.
Click to expand...


So you're an Democrat?  An Independent? An oather?  A Libertarian? a Teabagger?  A neocon?  A birther?   Seeing that YOU are desperately avoiding the FACTS of what I'm discussing here puts you on par with the forementioned.  Or are you such an intellectual coward that you'll just lie and deny while indirectly defending clowns like Walsh? 

And you seem fond of accusing me of being "...petulant, spoiled rotten little fucking child".  Please explain to everyone how pointing out the sheer dishonesty of Walsh's little political grandstand makes the critic out to what you accuse?  And if you can't/won't do that, then please LOGICALLLY AND FACTUALLY fault me.  And if you can't do that, then I'll just ignore you for your little neocon hissy fit.


----------



## Oddball

Aw dry up, Sally.


----------



## taichiliberal

Oddball said:


> Aw dry up, Sally.



Just as I figured, folks....this neocon Oddball is just an ignorant blowhard who only appeases idiots like Dive Con.  Oddball out.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/tea-party/154056-the-tea-bag-follies-continue-2.html#post3292962


----------



## Anachronism

taichi, I'm no supporter of ANY political party (D, R, or Tea) but I have to say that those 17 individuals have done exactly what I would expect them to do.... Turn down a plan that they disagree with. The fact that they have the ability to get medical coverage from other places is exactly what Conservatives like me want EVERYONE to do.... Get it through your EMPLOYER (not the government) or PAY FOR IT YOURSELF. If you can't do either.... TOO BAD, SO SAD, SO SORRY. There are VERY FEW legitimate exceptions to that philosophy so far as I'm concerned.


----------



## DiveCon

Anachronism said:


> taichi, I'm no supporter of ANY political party (D, R, or Tea) but I have to say that those 17 individuals have done exactly what I would expect them to do.... Turn down a plan that they disagree with. The fact that they have the ability to get medical coverage from other places is exactly what Conservatives like me want EVERYONE to do.... Get it through your EMPLOYER (not the government) or PAY FOR IT YOURSELF. If you can't do either.... TOO BAD, SO SAD, SO SORRY. There are VERY FEW legitimate exceptions to that philosophy so far as I'm concerned.


he's an idiot that doesnt even know what a neocon is and he calls anyone that disagrees with his bullshit one


----------



## Avatar4321

so 17 Congressmen turn down their health package and it's a bad thing?

If only more Congressmen were more focused on public service than the financial compensation they recieve for it, this nation would be a much better place!


----------



## California Girl

taichiliberal said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, they accept the benefits and they're hypocrites, yet if they refuse them it's an  empty gesture.
> 
> Like we needed more evidence that no matter what you do, it'll never be enough to please the spoiled little brat children of the American left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignore it. It's just the 'oh fuck, what can we whine about now' brigade. Sad bastards.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me dumb it down for you, you mentally challenged California Girl.....Walsh turning down the health care benefits given to congressmen IS AN EMPTY GESTURE ON HIS PART, AS HIS FINANCIAL SITUATION VIA HIS ADVISOR STATUS AT HIS OLD JOB MORE THAN COMPENSATES FOR THE LACK OF INSURANCE THAT WOULD COVER HIS WIFE'S PRE-EXISTING CONDITION. And the other teabagger friendly GOP'ers all have private insurance that they can afford that meets their needs.
> 
> The average working family, middle, lower, and working poor, DO NOT HAVE FINANCIAL OPTIONS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE DENIALS OF PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS UNDER THE OLD INSURANCE COMPANIES...which is what the teabagger/neocon GOP so desperately want to maintain.
> 
> Don't get pissed at me, bunky.....it's YOUR teabagger/neocon leadership that are playing YOU for suckers.
Click to expand...


No need to dumb your posts down for me.... you achieve your own unique level of stupidity that I find remarkably easy to interpret. Each and every one confirms that you have the intellectual capacity of a house plant. 

But, it's always entertaining to see someone who is so desperate to make some imaginary point that they resort to CAPITAL LETTERS.


----------



## CoolBreeze

If a person, Congressman or not has a better medical plan than is offered him in his congressional capacity, he is suppose to drop it and take one of lesser value and benifits?  A person who is responsible for their family will naturally obtain the best healthcare they can afford for their family.

The reason that Obamacare is not wanted is because it is unconstitutional.  The federal government can not force a citizen to purchase anything, plain and simple.

Get over it and go change the sheets on your bed.


----------



## Intense

Avatar4321 said:


> so 17 Congressmen turn down their health package and it's a bad thing?
> 
> If only more Congressmen were more focused on public service than the financial compensation they recieve for it, this nation would be a much better place!



17 Congressmen turn down Federally Paid Health insurance Saving the Government how much? TiChewLisp spins it into being a bad thing??? Fuck Him/Her and the Horse He/She rode in on. What a Piece of work.


----------



## taichiliberal

Anachronism said:


> taichi, I'm no supporter of ANY political party (D, R, or Tea) but I have to say that those 17 individuals have done exactly what I would expect them to do.... Turn down a plan that they disagree with. The fact that they have the ability to get medical coverage from other places is exactly what Conservatives like me want EVERYONE to do.... Get it through your EMPLOYER (not the government) or PAY FOR IT YOURSELF. If you can't do either.... TOO BAD, SO SAD, SO SORRY. There are VERY FEW legitimate exceptions to that philosophy so far as I'm concerned.



Let me clarify a few things for you:

1.  People who were paying for their own health insurance WERE GETTING SCREWED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.  Don't take my word for it, go research the testimonies of Wendell Potter and Dr. Peeno for starters.  THAT is the main part of the Healthcare Reform that the insurance companies are fighting so hard against.   The ONLY thing "conservatives like" YOU are "conserving are the insurance companies ability to screw you whenever/however they want without rhyme or reason (i.e., accountability) to anyone.  So far, it hasn't happened to you, but it has to others.....but it WON'T happen to Walsh or his cronies, as THEY are part of a system that financially guarantees their healthcare.

2.  The financial institutions like Walsh belongs to GREATLY BENEFITTED from the public dole from gov't deregualtion and subsequent bailouts (remember, the latter was started under Bush)....that means the "survival of the fittest" fantasy you've adhered to DOES NOT EXIST for Walsh and his buddies.

3.  I'm always fascinated by Americans who have deluded themselves to believe that they are living some version of early pioneer/settler life where they live solely by their own mettle and by their own "bootstraps".  WAKE UP, Anachronism!  YOU are a product of a federally gov't assistance and unions that have given you the opportunities and lifestyle that you are accustomed to today.  Think not?  Then leave your working hours and salary to the whims of your employer, DON'T get your kids vaccinated, rate the sanitary conditions of your food on your own, as with your water, etc.  Forget set rates for anything....free market competiton will leave you to pay whatever someone decides, so yo-yo prices will abound.  Don't like it....well TOO BAD, according to your philosophy.   

Think, Anachronism, THINK.....in the last 30 years we've seen massive layoffs, downsizing, etc., by corporations and businesses (while suddenly claiming profits year end)....so according to you, those people should just wonder off and die rather than have a gov't assistance programs.  I seriously doubt that if YOU were laid off and/or your insurance company denied your wife and/or kids healthcare, YOU would just say "too bad" and watch them die or starve to death....and if you would, then I pity you.


----------



## taichiliberal

Avatar4321 said:


> so 17 Congressmen turn down their health package and it's a bad thing?
> 
> It's an EMPTY GESTURE.....they can AFFORD to do it.   The people who would benefit from the Healthcare Reform law they want to overturn CAN'T.  THEY ARE NOT SACRIFICING ANYTHING!
> If only more Congressmen were more focused on public service than the financial compensation they recieve for it, this nation would be a much better place!



A moot point with regards to the topic at hand....these teabagger congressmen want to return to a status quo that was doing a disservice to the hard working people that faithfully paid into the health insurance industry.  Walsh is a hypocrit and a liar....as I've pointed out in the opening post.


----------



## taichiliberal

California Girl said:


> taichiliberal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ignore it. It's just the 'oh fuck, what can we whine about now' brigade. Sad bastards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me dumb it down for you, you mentally challenged California Girl.....Walsh turning down the health care benefits given to congressmen IS AN EMPTY GESTURE ON HIS PART, AS HIS FINANCIAL SITUATION VIA HIS ADVISOR STATUS AT HIS OLD JOB MORE THAN COMPENSATES FOR THE LACK OF INSURANCE THAT WOULD COVER HIS WIFE'S PRE-EXISTING CONDITION. And the other teabagger friendly GOP'ers all have private insurance that they can afford that meets their needs.
> 
> The average working family, middle, lower, and working poor, DO NOT HAVE FINANCIAL OPTIONS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE DENIALS OF PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS UNDER THE OLD INSURANCE COMPANIES...which is what the teabagger/neocon GOP so desperately want to maintain.
> 
> Don't get pissed at me, bunky.....it's YOUR teabagger/neocon leadership that are playing YOU for suckers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No need to dumb your posts down for me.... you achieve your own unique level of stupidity that I find remarkably easy to interpret. Each and every one confirms that you have the intellectual capacity of a house plant.
> 
> If you can't take it, don't dish it out, my mentally challenged California Girl.  As the thread shows, it was YOU who entered an ignorant and childish assessment of what I posted....and you did so insultingly.  Next, act like you have some sense and I'll won't treat you like a petulant child.
> 
> But, it's always entertaining to see someone who is so desperate to make some imaginary point that they resort to CAPITAL LETTERS.
Click to expand...


As you can see folks, our dim California Girl can't logically or factually refute the FACTS that I put forth in the opening  post here....so she just tries to hide her ignorance with sour grapes a faux condescending attitude.

Walsh knows his audience.....willfully ignorant neocon parrots like our California girl.


----------



## taichiliberal

CoolBreeze said:


> If a person, Congressman or not has a better medical plan than is offered him in his congressional capacity, he is suppose to drop it and take one of lesser value and benifits?
> 
> Ahhh, but that is NOT what Walsh has stated or implied......he has said that by denying the Congressional healthcare options, he is DENYING his wife an insurance option for her "pre-condition".  I don't know about you, but that's fucking stupid....if my wife is sick, and I (allegedly) couldn't get healthcare insurance or afford to pay for it previously, I jolly well would jump onto a plan that would help her.  Only a fanatic wouldn't....and as I pointed out, Walsh is just a bullshit artist, not a fanatic.
> A person who is responsible for their family will naturally obtain the best healthcare they can afford for their family.
> 
> See above.
> 
> The reason that Obamacare is not wanted is because it is unconstitutional.  A lie.....as to date no one has logically or factually proven so in a court case......a judge has STATED such but has NOT made a formal case ruling.  The federal government can not force a citizen to purchase anything, plain and simple.
> 
> Really?  Then don't purchase a car and forgo auto insurance, don't go anywhere that may require a specific type of ID (driver or non-driver)...I could go on, but hopefully you've gotten the point as to the error of your assertion.
> 
> Get over it and go change the sheets on your bed.



Hey, I'm over the insipidly stubborness and willful ignorance of folk like you when it comes to the FACTS I've pointed out.  Evidently, YOU'RE not.


----------



## taichiliberal

Intense said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> so 17 Congressmen turn down their health package and it's a bad thing?
> 
> If only more Congressmen were more focused on public service than the financial compensation they recieve for it, this nation would be a much better place!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 17 Congressmen turn down Federally Paid Health insurance Saving the Government how much? TiChewLisp spins it into being a bad thing??? Fuck Him/Her and the Horse He/She rode in on. What a Piece of work.
Click to expand...


As you can see folks, our Intensely stupid teabagger/neocon clown here, has to educated:


1)  The Congressmen are just turning down the HEALTHCARE aspects of their gov't benefits package....no one said they were rejecting the OTHER aspects of that package.

2)  They announced that they are doing so NOT to save money by as an example of their commitment to reject/repeal the recently passed Healthcare Reform law.

3)  This is an empty gesture, as these congressmen were in a financial bracket that gave them access to BETTER healthcare packages than their constituents.

4)  This gesture does not address the fact that these congressmen want to remove the stipulations that would prevent health insurance companies from denying pre-condition patients or dropping customers for questionable reasons....something that there less wealthier constituents are prone to.

But, it does seem that Walsh and company know that there's a sucker born every minute.  Did our Intense-ly dumb friend here THINK that Walsh, a venture capitalist with a successful firm, was letting his wife "suffer"?  Or that with his dual income (advisory board member) that he would opt to let her continue suffering for some teabagger ideology?  Personally, I'd be scared of such a fanatic.


----------



## Madeline




----------



## Madeline

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb_yqcxiVlY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb_yqcxiVlY[/ame]


----------



## Madeline

> The charge of "racism" is one that the Tea Party movement would like to shake. In the past, it has dismissed the label as only representing a few of its members on the fringe. However, the issue surfaced again on Wednesday when the NAACP -- which made news in July when it asked the Tea Party to repudiate racist elements within its ranks  issued a report that details associations between Tea Party organizations and hate groups in this country.
> 
> In a conference call with journalists, NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said that while there are policy disagreements, the civil rights group has "no problem with the Tea Party expressing their views in their great debate in our great democracy." The majority of Tea Party members "are sincere," and some are also in the NAACP, he said.
> "We do however have a problem when prominent Tea Party members" use Tea Party events to recruit people for white supremacist groups, Jealous said. The NAACP is urging leadership and members of the Tea Party movement to take additional steps to distance themselves from those Tea Party leaders "who espouse racist ideas, advocate violence, or are formally affiliated with white supremacist organizations."
> 
> He said the expulsion of Mark Williams of Tea Party Express was a step in the right direction, but said that Williams had been making controversial statements long before he was ousted for writing a mocking letter suggesting that blacks preferred life under slavery.
> 
> Some Tea Party leaders condemned the report, accusing the NAACP of abandoning its civil rights mission and of becoming a mouthpiece of the liberal left.
> In a statement before the report's release, Jealous said, "These groups and individuals are out there, and we ignore them at our own peril. They are speaking at Tea Party events, recruiting at rallies and in some cases remain in the Tea Party leadership itself. The danger is not that the majority of Tea Party members share their views, but that left unchecked, these extremists might indirectly influence the direction of the Tea Party and therefore the direction of our country: moving it backward and not forward."
> The report, co-authored by Devin Burghart and Leonard Zeskind of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, examines six Tea Party groups: FreedomWorks Tea Party, 1776 Tea Party, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots, ResistNet, and Tea Party Express.
> Zeskind, who was also on the conference call, said they began research a year ago when they noticed that the white supremacist group stormfront.org had "started a thread to move into the Tea Party." Burghart explained the report's methodology and data-gathering techniques, which included investigating campaign finance reports, printed and online literature, Tea Party membership, government documents and databases (including court cases) finance reports and corporate filings. They also interviewed activists.
> A document, "The Tea Party: The Racism Within," lists six "Profiles of Troubling Tea Partiers" with current or one-time ties to white nationalist organizations. It singles out Roan Garcia-Quintana, "advisor and media spokesman" for the 2010 Tax Day Tea Party in South Carolina. A member of ResistNet, he also serves on the National Board of Directors of the Council of Conservative Citizens, whose statement of principles opposes "all efforts to mix the races of mankind."
> 
> The NAACP said the decentralized nature of the Tea Party movement makes it difficult to police disparate groups for members who cross the line, but Jealous specifically called on Dick Armey of FreedomWorks and Sarah Palin, who "is out there with Tea Party Express," to take a more aggressive stand against intolerance.
> "Here we go again," Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, told the Kansas City Star. "This is typical of this liberal group's smear tactics." Phillips was an organizer of the Tea Party national conference in February.
> 
> Sal Russo, a California political consultant and chief strategist for the Tea Party Express, told the Star, "To attack a grassroots movement of this magnitude with sundry isolated incidents only goes to show the NAACP has abandoned the cause of civil rights for the advancement of liberal Democrat politics."
> 
> In addition to the report, the NAACP has been running Tea Party Tracker, a Web site in partnership with ThinkProgress, Media Matters and New Left Media set up to monitor "extremism in the Tea Party movement."



NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to 'Hate Groups'


----------



## Mini 14

meh, you're knee is jerking.


----------



## Dr.House

I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...


----------



## Mad Scientist

Oh my! This changes my perspective completely! I've just realized that the US *isn't* spending itself into oblivion and that Obama and the Liberal Democrats are our saviors!

That settles it, I'm voting Democrat in 2012!


----------



## Madeline

Mad Scientist said:


> Oh my! This changes my perspective completely! I've just realized that the US *isn't* spending itself into oblivion and that Obama and the Liberal Democrats are our saviors!
> 
> That settles it, I'm voting Democrat in 2012!



Meh, I was bored so I decided to stir the pot.

I am looking at being backed into a corner:  either I agree we should spend ourselves into oblivion or I sign on for hate.

I cannot agree to *either*  one.  Where's MY party?  Where's MY candidate?


----------



## AllieBaba

Don't hate us cuz we're beautiful, Maddie!

The things you despise about the tea party are thes same things I like. I like straight  talk, and every one of those signs I see (I didn't look at the clip or follow any links) I agree with.


----------



## Samson

Dr.House said:


> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...


----------



## boedicca

And this is why the Tea Party will continue to act to protect our liberty, despite all the attacks from the Big Government Cronyists:

_Over almost a century, under the influence of the Progressives and their heirs&#8212;the proponents of the New Deal, the Great Society, and Barack Obama&#8217;s New Foundation we have experienced a gradual consolidation of power in the federal government. Legislative responsibilities have been transferred to administrative agencies lodged within the executive&#8212;such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, and the vast array of bodies established under the recent health-care reform&#8212;and these have been delegated in an ever increasing number of spheres the authority to issue rules and regulations that have the force of law.

In the process, the state and local governments have become dependent on federal largesse, which always comes with strings attached in the form of funded or unfunded &#8220;mandates&#8221; designed to make these governments fall in line with federal policy. Civic agency, rooted as it normally is in locality, has withered as the localities have lost their leverage. The civic associations so admired by Alexis de Tocqueville have for the most part become lobbying operations with offices in Washington focused on influencing federal policy, and many of them have also become recipients of government grants and reliable instruments for the implementation of federal policy.

The Tea Party movement is, however, testimony to the fact that all is not lost. When confronted in a brazen fashion with the tyrannical impulse underpinning the administrative state, ordinary Americans from all walks of life are still capable of fighting back. It is easy enough to mock. Like all spontaneous popular movements, the Tea Party has attracted its fair share of cranks: it would have been a miracle if it had not attracted those who are obsessed with the question of Barack Obama&#8217;s birth certificate or the heavy-handed and ineffective procedures adopted by the Transportation Security Agency.

_____________

But it should be reassuring rather than frightening to the American elite that at the dawn of the third millennium, Americans know to become nervous and watchful when a presidential candidate who has presented himself to the public as a moderate devotee of bipartisanship intent on eliminating waste in federal programs suddenly endorses &#8220;spreading the wealth around&#8221; and on the eve of his election speaks of &#8220;fundamentally transforming America.&#8221; It should be of comfort to them that a small-business owner in Nebraska believes he has reason to express public qualms when a prospective White House chief of staff, in the midst of an economic downturn, announces that the new administration is not about to &#8220;let a serious crisis go to waste&#8221; and that it intends to exploit that crisis as &#8220;an opportunity to do things you couldn&#8217;t do before.&#8221; And it should be a source of pride to elites that the philosophical superstructure of the United States demonstrated extraordinary durability when a significant number of their fellow citizens refused to sit silent after an administration implied the inadequacy of the founding by promoting itself as the New Foundation, and after the head of government specifically questioned the special place of the United States in the world by denying &#8220;American exceptionalism.&#8221;

Most important, it should be humbling to those elites that ordinary American citizens choose spontaneously to enter the political arena in droves, concert opposition, speak up in a forthright manner, and oust a host of entrenched office holders when they learn that a system of punitive taxation is in the offing, when they are repeatedly told what they know to be false&#8212;that, under the new health-care system that the administration is intent on establishing, benefits will be extended and costs reduced and no one will lose the coverage he already has&#8212;and when they discover that Medicare is to be gutted, that medical care is to be rationed, and that citizens who have no desire to purchase health insurance are going to be forced to do so.

In 1776, when George Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, he included a provision reflecting what the revolutionaries had learned from the long period of struggle between Court and Country in England and in America:* &#8220;that no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.&#8221; *What we are witnessing with the Tea Party movement is one of the periodic recurrences to fundamental principles that typify and revivify the American experiment in self-government...._


How to Think About the Tea Party « Commentary Magazine


----------



## AllieBaba

I think that the NAACP's apparent fear of the tea party is evidence that the tea party is on the right track.


----------



## Article 15

You despise the Tea Partiers because they have some nutters amongst their ranks?


----------



## Toro

Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.

But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?


----------



## Madeline

Article 15 said:


> You despise the Tea Partiers because they have some nutters amongst their ranks?



O let's not be coy here, Art.  These haters are far more than a "fringe" in the Tea Party.

Ron Paul?  You really think I could EVA get behind him?

No fucking way.

Ron Paul Wins CPAC Presidential Straw Poll With 30% of Vote!


----------



## Mad Scientist

Madeline said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my! This changes my perspective completely! I've just realized that the US *isn't* spending itself into oblivion and that Obama and the Liberal Democrats are our saviors!
> 
> That settles it, I'm voting Democrat in 2012!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, I was bored so I decided to stir the pot.
> 
> I am looking at being backed into a corner:  either I agree we should spend ourselves into oblivion or I sign on for hate.
> 
> I cannot agree to *either*  one.  Where's MY party?  Where's MY candidate?
Click to expand...

So if a KKK member said "You need to balance your check book" you *wouldn't* balance your check book? 

Louis Farahkhan: "You need to raise your kids right!" Madeline: "Oh no I won't!" 
David Duke: "You should eat a balanced breakfast". Madeline: "Fuck you! I'm gonna' eat candy!"


----------



## Madeline

Toro said:


> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?



Prolly not the majority, no.

But not a "fringe element", either.


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?


nope


----------



## DiveCon

Madeline said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prolly not the majority, no.
> 
> But not a "fringe element", either.
Click to expand...

btw, the irrationality you show in THIS thread, is typical of your palin irrationality


----------



## Samson

DiveCon said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prolly not the majority, no.
> 
> But not a "fringe element", either.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> btw, the irrationality you show in THIS thread, is typical of your palin irrationality
Click to expand...


I've always suspected suspect Madeline and Palin are competing for irrational thoughts.


----------



## Trajan

Madeline said:


> The charge of "racism" is one that the Tea Party movement would like to shake. In the past, it has dismissed the label as only representing a few of its members on the fringe. However, the issue surfaced again on Wednesday when the NAACP -- which made news in July when it asked the Tea Party to repudiate racist elements within its ranks  issued a report that details associations between Tea Party organizations and hate groups in this country.
> 
> In a conference call with journalists, NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said that while there are policy disagreements, the civil rights group has "no problem with the Tea Party expressing their views in their great debate in our great democracy." The majority of Tea Party members "are sincere," and some are also in the NAACP, he said.
> "We do however have a problem when prominent Tea Party members" use Tea Party events to recruit people for white supremacist groups, Jealous said. The NAACP is urging leadership and members of the Tea Party movement to take additional steps to distance themselves from those Tea Party leaders "who espouse racist ideas, advocate violence, or are formally affiliated with white supremacist organizations."
> 
> He said the expulsion of Mark Williams of Tea Party Express was a step in the right direction, but said that Williams had been making controversial statements long before he was ousted for writing a mocking letter suggesting that blacks preferred life under slavery.
> 
> Some Tea Party leaders condemned the report, accusing the NAACP of abandoning its civil rights mission and of becoming a mouthpiece of the liberal left.
> In a statement before the report's release, Jealous said, "These groups and individuals are out there, and we ignore them at our own peril. They are speaking at Tea Party events, recruiting at rallies and in some cases remain in the Tea Party leadership itself. The danger is not that the majority of Tea Party members share their views, but that left unchecked, these extremists might indirectly influence the direction of the Tea Party and therefore the direction of our country: moving it backward and not forward."
> The report, co-authored by Devin Burghart and Leonard Zeskind of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, examines six Tea Party groups: FreedomWorks Tea Party, 1776 Tea Party, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots, ResistNet, and Tea Party Express.
> Zeskind, who was also on the conference call, said they began research a year ago when they noticed that the white supremacist group stormfront.org had "started a thread to move into the Tea Party." Burghart explained the report's methodology and data-gathering techniques, which included investigating campaign finance reports, printed and online literature, Tea Party membership, government documents and databases (including court cases) finance reports and corporate filings. They also interviewed activists.
> A document, "The Tea Party: The Racism Within," lists six "Profiles of Troubling Tea Partiers" with current or one-time ties to white nationalist organizations. It singles out Roan Garcia-Quintana, "advisor and media spokesman" for the 2010 Tax Day Tea Party in South Carolina. A member of ResistNet, he also serves on the National Board of Directors of the Council of Conservative Citizens, whose statement of principles opposes "all efforts to mix the races of mankind."
> 
> The NAACP said the decentralized nature of the Tea Party movement makes it difficult to police disparate groups for members who cross the line, but Jealous specifically called on Dick Armey of FreedomWorks and Sarah Palin, who "is out there with Tea Party Express," to take a more aggressive stand against intolerance.
> "Here we go again," Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, told the Kansas City Star. "This is typical of this liberal group's smear tactics." Phillips was an organizer of the Tea Party national conference in February.
> 
> Sal Russo, a California political consultant and chief strategist for the Tea Party Express, told the Star, "To attack a grassroots movement of this magnitude with sundry isolated incidents only goes to show the NAACP has abandoned the cause of civil rights for the advancement of liberal Democrat politics."
> 
> In addition to the report, the NAACP has been running Tea Party Tracker, a Web site in partnership with ThinkProgress, Media Matters and New Left Media set up to monitor "extremism in the Tea Party movement."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to 'Hate Groups'
Click to expand...


the pics speak for themselves, they are vile and are trash.*shrugs*

I don't need a lost, sellout, criminally hypocritical  organization to tell me that.


----------



## Stephanie

Dang, I thought there was going to be SOME real bad stuff for her to DISPISE us all.

and all there is, is a few damn posters OMG omg omg omg

doesn't take much to get their panties in a bunch. .


----------



## Madeline

DiveCon said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prolly not the majority, no.
> 
> But not a "fringe element", either.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> btw, the irrationality you show in THIS thread, is typical of your palin irrationality
Click to expand...


Then, IYO "irrational" = disagrees with you?

C'mon, Divey.


----------



## Madeline

Stephanie said:


> Dang, I thought there was going to be SOME real bad stuff for her to DISPISE us all.
> 
> and all there is, is a few damn posters OMG omg omg omg
> 
> doesn't take much to get their panties in a bunch. .



I guess reading the linked article is above your pay grade, Stephanie.


----------



## DiveCon

Madeline said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prolly not the majority, no.
> 
> But not a "fringe element", either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btw, the irrationality you show in THIS thread, is typical of your palin irrationality
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then, IYO "irrational" = disagrees with you?
> 
> C'mon, Divey.
Click to expand...

no, maddy
you dont see the irrationality you have shown in this thread?
painting all tea partiers as racists and bigots?


----------



## California Girl

I despise ignorant people who get their information from the media instead of proactively studying a topic before forming an 'opinion'. 

The HuffPuff.... *Snickers*


----------



## Stephanie

Madeline said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dang, I thought there was going to be SOME real bad stuff for her to DISPISE us all.
> 
> and all there is, is a few damn posters OMG omg omg omg
> 
> doesn't take much to get their panties in a bunch. .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess reading the linked article is above your pay grade, Stephanie.
Click to expand...


nope not above it, just don't care to read or give a shit what the NAACP says..


----------



## Samson

California Girl said:


> I despise ignorant people who get their information from the media instead of proactively studying a topic before forming an 'opinion'.
> 
> The HuffPuff.... *Snickers*



I despise ignorant people who do not brush regularly.


----------



## Madeline

California Girl said:


> I despise ignorant people who get their information from the media instead of proactively studying a topic before forming an 'opinion'.
> 
> The HuffPuff.... *Snickers*



Of COURSE!  What was I thinking?  I'm sure the HuffPo photoshopped all those images.

Liar.


----------



## MikeK

Dr.House said:


> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...


I'm quite sure the same comment was made by some casual observers in the early days of the Nazi Party, which consisted mainly of decent, well-meaning but grossly disillusioned Germans who were guided by a small but motivated group of hate-filled Hitler acolytes.  

This is how it starts!


----------



## The Infidel

This is why I hate *ALL you lefties*..... I can use a broad brush too ya "broad"


----------



## Madeline

Stephanie said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dang, I thought there was going to be SOME real bad stuff for her to DISPISE us all.
> 
> and all there is, is a few damn posters OMG omg omg omg
> 
> doesn't take much to get their panties in a bunch. .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess reading the linked article is above your pay grade, Stephanie.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> nope not above it, just don't care to read or give a shit what the NAACP says..
Click to expand...


Good!  I'm sure Ron Paul will tell you The Truth, if you just wait for it.

Till hell freezes over.


----------



## Samson

The Infidel said:


> This is why I hate *ALL you lefties*..... I can use a broad brush too ya "broad"



*I despise people that copy posts full of images: Bandwidth is a precious resource GODDAMN YOU!!!*


----------



## Stephanie

Madeline said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess reading the linked article is above your pay grade, Stephanie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nope not above it, just don't care to read or give a shit what the NAACP says..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good!  I'm sure Ron Paul will tell you The Truth, if you just wait for it.
> 
> Till hell freezes over.
Click to expand...


----------



## Dr.House

The truly ironic thing I see is that the OP is the only poster here who I believe would go to a rally carrying a "The only good Palin is a dead Palin" sign....


----------



## California Girl

Madeline said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I despise ignorant people who get their information from the media instead of proactively studying a topic before forming an 'opinion'.
> 
> The HuffPuff.... *Snickers*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of COURSE!  What was I thinking?  I'm sure the HuffPo photoshopped all those images.
> 
> Liar.
Click to expand...


Think? You?   The next time you demonstrate the ability to think will be the first. 

FYI: Last summer, the HuffPuff had 3000 'citizen journalists' to 'report' on the TEA Parties. They scrapped that little idea because a lot of their 'journalists' admitted to taking their own signs along, photographing themselves as 'TEA Partiers' and flooded the net with them. 

That sort of blows any claims of legitimacy regarding images purporting to come from the TEA Parties. 

Seems to me, you just 'despise' anyone who disagrees with your moronic 'opinions'.


----------



## The Infidel

*Oh... and did I mention *


----------



## The Infidel

Samson said:


> *I despise people that copy posts full of images: Bandwidth is a precious resource GODDAMN YOU!!!*


----------



## Mad Scientist

Samson said:


> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why I hate *ALL you lefties*..... I can use a broad brush too ya "broad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I despise people that copy posts full of images: Bandwidth is a precious resource GODDAMN YOU!!!*
Click to expand...






The Infidel said:


> *Oh... and did I mention *


Agreed!


----------



## The Infidel

Mad Scientist said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why I hate *ALL you lefties*..... I can use a broad brush too ya "broad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I despise people that copy posts full of images: Bandwidth is a precious resource GODDAMN YOU!!!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh... and did I mention *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Agreed!
Click to expand...


Thanks....


----------



## Madeline

boedicca said:


> And this is why the Tea Party will continue to act to protect our liberty, despite all the attacks from the Big Government Cronyists:
> 
> _Over almost a century, under the influence of the Progressives and their heirsthe proponents of the New Deal, the Great Society, and Barack Obamas New Foundation we have experienced a gradual consolidation of power in the federal government. Legislative responsibilities have been transferred to administrative agencies lodged within the executivesuch as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, and the vast array of bodies established under the recent health-care reformand these have been delegated in an ever increasing number of spheres the authority to issue rules and regulations that have the force of law.
> 
> In the process, the state and local governments have become dependent on federal largesse, which always comes with strings attached in the form of funded or unfunded mandates designed to make these governments fall in line with federal policy. Civic agency, rooted as it normally is in locality, has withered as the localities have lost their leverage. The civic associations so admired by Alexis de Tocqueville have for the most part become lobbying operations with offices in Washington focused on influencing federal policy, and many of them have also become recipients of government grants and reliable instruments for the implementation of federal policy.
> 
> The Tea Party movement is, however, testimony to the fact that all is not lost. When confronted in a brazen fashion with the tyrannical impulse underpinning the administrative state, ordinary Americans from all walks of life are still capable of fighting back. It is easy enough to mock. Like all spontaneous popular movements, the Tea Party has attracted its fair share of cranks: it would have been a miracle if it had not attracted those who are obsessed with the question of Barack Obamas birth certificate or the heavy-handed and ineffective procedures adopted by the Transportation Security Agency.
> 
> _____________
> 
> But it should be reassuring rather than frightening to the American elite that at the dawn of the third millennium, Americans know to become nervous and watchful when a presidential candidate who has presented himself to the public as a moderate devotee of bipartisanship intent on eliminating waste in federal programs suddenly endorses spreading the wealth around and on the eve of his election speaks of fundamentally transforming America. It should be of comfort to them that a small-business owner in Nebraska believes he has reason to express public qualms when a prospective White House chief of staff, in the midst of an economic downturn, announces that the new administration is not about to let a serious crisis go to waste and that it intends to exploit that crisis as an opportunity to do things you couldnt do before. And it should be a source of pride to elites that the philosophical superstructure of the United States demonstrated extraordinary durability when a significant number of their fellow citizens refused to sit silent after an administration implied the inadequacy of the founding by promoting itself as the New Foundation, and after the head of government specifically questioned the special place of the United States in the world by denying American exceptionalism.
> 
> Most important, it should be humbling to those elites that ordinary American citizens choose spontaneously to enter the political arena in droves, concert opposition, speak up in a forthright manner, and oust a host of entrenched office holders when they learn that a system of punitive taxation is in the offing, when they are repeatedly told what they know to be falsethat, under the new health-care system that the administration is intent on establishing, benefits will be extended and costs reduced and no one will lose the coverage he already hasand when they discover that Medicare is to be gutted, that medical care is to be rationed, and that citizens who have no desire to purchase health insurance are going to be forced to do so.
> 
> In 1776, when George Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, he included a provision reflecting what the revolutionaries had learned from the long period of struggle between Court and Country in England and in America:* that no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. *What we are witnessing with the Tea Party movement is one of the periodic recurrences to fundamental principles that typify and revivify the American experiment in self-government...._
> 
> 
> How to Think About the Tea Party « Commentary Magazine



I think this is good piece, as far it goes, boedicca.  The Tea Party had its chance to reject the haters in its midst, and did not.  

I appreciate the activism of any American...but for me, the Tea Party boat has long since sailed.


----------



## The Infidel

Madeline said:


> I think this is good piece, as far it goes, boedicca.  The Tea Party had its chance to reject the haters in its midst, and did not.
> 
> I appreciate the activism of any American...but for me, the Tea Party boat has long since sailed.



*Maddie.... you are lying and I am extremely dissapointed!*

I could, but Im not, going to go get video of idiots being boo-ed out of Tea Party rallies.

You wouldnt believe them, and would just dismiss them as fakes so whatever.


----------



## Stephanie

Madeline said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> And this is why the Tea Party will continue to act to protect our liberty, despite all the attacks from the Big Government Cronyists:
> 
> _Over almost a century, under the influence of the Progressives and their heirsthe proponents of the New Deal, the Great Society, and Barack Obamas New Foundation we have experienced a gradual consolidation of power in the federal government. Legislative responsibilities have been transferred to administrative agencies lodged within the executivesuch as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, and the vast array of bodies established under the recent health-care reformand these have been delegated in an ever increasing number of spheres the authority to issue rules and regulations that have the force of law.
> 
> In the process, the state and local governments have become dependent on federal largesse, which always comes with strings attached in the form of funded or unfunded mandates designed to make these governments fall in line with federal policy. Civic agency, rooted as it normally is in locality, has withered as the localities have lost their leverage. The civic associations so admired by Alexis de Tocqueville have for the most part become lobbying operations with offices in Washington focused on influencing federal policy, and many of them have also become recipients of government grants and reliable instruments for the implementation of federal policy.
> 
> The Tea Party movement is, however, testimony to the fact that all is not lost. When confronted in a brazen fashion with the tyrannical impulse underpinning the administrative state, ordinary Americans from all walks of life are still capable of fighting back. It is easy enough to mock. Like all spontaneous popular movements, the Tea Party has attracted its fair share of cranks: it would have been a miracle if it had not attracted those who are obsessed with the question of Barack Obamas birth certificate or the heavy-handed and ineffective procedures adopted by the Transportation Security Agency.
> 
> _____________
> 
> But it should be reassuring rather than frightening to the American elite that at the dawn of the third millennium, Americans know to become nervous and watchful when a presidential candidate who has presented himself to the public as a moderate devotee of bipartisanship intent on eliminating waste in federal programs suddenly endorses spreading the wealth around and on the eve of his election speaks of fundamentally transforming America. It should be of comfort to them that a small-business owner in Nebraska believes he has reason to express public qualms when a prospective White House chief of staff, in the midst of an economic downturn, announces that the new administration is not about to let a serious crisis go to waste and that it intends to exploit that crisis as an opportunity to do things you couldnt do before. And it should be a source of pride to elites that the philosophical superstructure of the United States demonstrated extraordinary durability when a significant number of their fellow citizens refused to sit silent after an administration implied the inadequacy of the founding by promoting itself as the New Foundation, and after the head of government specifically questioned the special place of the United States in the world by denying American exceptionalism.
> 
> Most important, it should be humbling to those elites that ordinary American citizens choose spontaneously to enter the political arena in droves, concert opposition, speak up in a forthright manner, and oust a host of entrenched office holders when they learn that a system of punitive taxation is in the offing, when they are repeatedly told what they know to be falsethat, under the new health-care system that the administration is intent on establishing, benefits will be extended and costs reduced and no one will lose the coverage he already hasand when they discover that Medicare is to be gutted, that medical care is to be rationed, and that citizens who have no desire to purchase health insurance are going to be forced to do so.
> 
> In 1776, when George Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, he included a provision reflecting what the revolutionaries had learned from the long period of struggle between Court and Country in England and in America:* that no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. *What we are witnessing with the Tea Party movement is one of the periodic recurrences to fundamental principles that typify and revivify the American experiment in self-government...._
> 
> 
> How to Think About the Tea Party « Commentary Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think this is good piece, as far it goes, boedicca.  The Tea Party had its chance to reject the haters in its midst, and did not.
> 
> I appreciate the activism of any American...but for me, the Tea Party boat has long since sailed.
Click to expand...


sorry Maddie dear, but you of all people don't have room to talk about REJECTING haters.
And you can turn your nose up at regular American folk in the Tea Party, it don't make no difference to anyone.

now carry on haten.


----------



## Madeline

The left has its haters as well, The Infidel.  The animal rights freaks, the environmental nazis, etc.  No one has 100% clean hands.

But the Tea Party's leader and spokemen have revived (or invented) racial and religious bigotry, and I find that so much more vile.  It's a value judgment on my part, I will admit.

I would join you in hollaring down the house for fiscal restraint, but not at the expense of the peace and dignity of my neighbors.

So sorry if you were really upset by the thread.  Yanno I am fond of you.


----------



## Mini 14

On behalf of the Cherokee Nation:

"Heeeeyyyyyyy!!!!!!"

The thread is a little offensive Maddy, and extremely hypocritical.

I still love you


----------



## Stephanie

Who's upset with the thread, ANYONE?

I found it rather zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 

just another same ole same ole SHIT.


----------



## Anachronism

Madeline,

I haven't been around here long enough to know where you sit on the Political spectrum. In reality it doesn't really matter to me or to the arguement that I'm about to make related to your OP in this thread.....

You want to see the Tea Party "chastized" for its "Racist" elements. Ok, I can actually agree with you there. HOWEVER, I hope that you would also want both Major Political Parties to address similar radical groups in their midst.... like the members of the radical Green, Anti-Gun and Socialist movements in the Democratic Party. Or do you only want to see ONE side forced to "discipline" their members.

I am not a member of any political party. Personally I don't believe we should allow political parties in the United States. If we do, and if we wish to end these sorts of "problems" there is only ONE way to do it....

Implement a completely and totally illegal form of limitation on ALL political candidates..... Force them to stop making ANY comments (positive or negative) about anyone other than themselves in any form during the campaign. 

For example:

ALLOWED:  
I am a Strong Proponent of the Second Amendment.
I have voted to protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms
I will vote to protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms

NOT ALLOWED: 
My opponent is Not a Strong Proponent of the Second Amendment
My opponent is Strongly Against the Second Amendment
I am a Stronger Proponent of the Second Amendment than my opponent is.  

Until and unless that form of unConstitutional campaign reform is put into place, people are going to attack their political enemies. It's just a fact of life. Some people like that and some of us don't. That's a personal opinion.


----------



## The Infidel

Madeline said:


> The left has its haters as well, The Infidel.  The animal rights freaks, the environmental nazis, etc.  No one has 100% clean hands.
> 
> But the Tea Party's leader and spokemen have revived (or invented) racial and religious bigotry, and I find that so much more vile.  It's a value judgment on my part, I will admit.
> 
> I would join you in hollaring down the house for fiscal restraint, but not at the expense of the peace and dignity of my neighbors.
> 
> So sorry if you were really upset by the thread.  Yanno I am fond of you.



Im not going to sit back and just let you denegrate my beliefs.... The Tea Party is not a hate group, nor do they hate Obama because of his race...... ITS HIS IDEOLOGY we hate... not him!

I believe he is violating his oath to protect the Constitution and I and all my Tea Party brothers and sisters do not hate anybody. 

WE NEED TO GET BACK TO COMMON SENSE.... POLITICAL CORRECTNESS SHOULD BE SHUNNED.

We are losing the very basis of our nation, and for you to brush me and my friends with the paint you spread of hate in that thread..... well, Im dissapointed, thats all.


----------



## Stephanie

The Infidel said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> The left has its haters as well, The Infidel.  The animal rights freaks, the environmental nazis, etc.  No one has 100% clean hands.
> 
> But the Tea Party's leader and spokemen have revived (or invented) racial and religious bigotry, and I find that so much more vile.  It's a value judgment on my part, I will admit.
> 
> I would join you in hollaring down the house for fiscal restraint, but not at the expense of the peace and dignity of my neighbors.
> 
> So sorry if you were really upset by the thread.  Yanno I am fond of you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im not going to sit back and just let you denegrate my beliefs.... The Tea Party is not a hate group, nor do they hate Obama because of his race...... ITS HIS IDEOLOGY we hate... not him!
> 
> I believe he is violating his oath to protest the Constitution and I and all my Tea Party brothers and sisters do not hate anybody.
> 
> WE NEED TO GET BACK TO COMMON SENSE.... POLITICAL CORRECTNESS SHOULD BE SHUNNED.
> 
> We are losing the very basis of our nation, and for you to brush me and my friends with the paint you spread of hate in that thread..... well, Im dissapointed, thats all.
Click to expand...


----------



## The Infidel

Mini 14 said:


> *I still love you*




No.... I dont hate my friend Maddie either.

She just wont be getting a giant box of chocolates


----------



## Anachronism

Madeline said:


> I think this is good piece, as far it goes, boedicca.  The Tea Party had its chance to reject the haters in its midst, and did not.
> 
> I appreciate the activism of any American...but for me, the Tea Party boat has long since sailed.



Madeline, just as for ME, the vast majority of the members of the Democratic and Republican Party's boats have already sailed. As a CONSERVATIVE, there are very few politicians out there that I can even CONSIDER supporting. Hell, the last CONSERVATIVE elected official in Washington DC was ANDREW JACKSON.

It would seem to me that you're a much larger supporter of the Democratic Party. That's fine. For me their ship has sailed because they have refused to reject the Anti-Gun, Anti-Traditional Values, Anti-America, Anti-Capitalist elements on the fringe of their party.


----------



## Madeline

Anachronism said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think this is good piece, as far it goes, boedicca.  The Tea Party had its chance to reject the haters in its midst, and did not.
> 
> I appreciate the activism of any American...but for me, the Tea Party boat has long since sailed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline, just as for ME, the vast majority of the members of the Democratic and Republican Party's boats have already sailed. As a CONSERVATIVE, there are very few politicians out there that I can even CONSIDER supporting. Hell, the last CONSERVATIVE elected official in Washington DC was ANDREW JACKSON.
> 
> It would seem to me that you're a much larger supporter of the Democratic Party. That's fine. For me their ship has sailed because they have refused to reject the Anti-Gun, Anti-Traditional Values, Anti-America, Anti-Capitalist elements on the fringe of their party.
Click to expand...


Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?

I had a home in the GOP, and I feel as if I am losing it.


----------



## DiveCon

Madeline said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> And this is why the Tea Party will continue to act to protect our liberty, despite all the attacks from the Big Government Cronyists:
> 
> _Over almost a century, under the influence of the Progressives and their heirsthe proponents of the New Deal, the Great Society, and Barack Obamas New Foundation we have experienced a gradual consolidation of power in the federal government. Legislative responsibilities have been transferred to administrative agencies lodged within the executivesuch as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, and the vast array of bodies established under the recent health-care reformand these have been delegated in an ever increasing number of spheres the authority to issue rules and regulations that have the force of law.
> 
> In the process, the state and local governments have become dependent on federal largesse, which always comes with strings attached in the form of funded or unfunded mandates designed to make these governments fall in line with federal policy. Civic agency, rooted as it normally is in locality, has withered as the localities have lost their leverage. The civic associations so admired by Alexis de Tocqueville have for the most part become lobbying operations with offices in Washington focused on influencing federal policy, and many of them have also become recipients of government grants and reliable instruments for the implementation of federal policy.
> 
> The Tea Party movement is, however, testimony to the fact that all is not lost. When confronted in a brazen fashion with the tyrannical impulse underpinning the administrative state, ordinary Americans from all walks of life are still capable of fighting back. It is easy enough to mock. Like all spontaneous popular movements, the Tea Party has attracted its fair share of cranks: it would have been a miracle if it had not attracted those who are obsessed with the question of Barack Obamas birth certificate or the heavy-handed and ineffective procedures adopted by the Transportation Security Agency.
> 
> _____________
> 
> But it should be reassuring rather than frightening to the American elite that at the dawn of the third millennium, Americans know to become nervous and watchful when a presidential candidate who has presented himself to the public as a moderate devotee of bipartisanship intent on eliminating waste in federal programs suddenly endorses spreading the wealth around and on the eve of his election speaks of fundamentally transforming America. It should be of comfort to them that a small-business owner in Nebraska believes he has reason to express public qualms when a prospective White House chief of staff, in the midst of an economic downturn, announces that the new administration is not about to let a serious crisis go to waste and that it intends to exploit that crisis as an opportunity to do things you couldnt do before. And it should be a source of pride to elites that the philosophical superstructure of the United States demonstrated extraordinary durability when a significant number of their fellow citizens refused to sit silent after an administration implied the inadequacy of the founding by promoting itself as the New Foundation, and after the head of government specifically questioned the special place of the United States in the world by denying American exceptionalism.
> 
> Most important, it should be humbling to those elites that ordinary American citizens choose spontaneously to enter the political arena in droves, concert opposition, speak up in a forthright manner, and oust a host of entrenched office holders when they learn that a system of punitive taxation is in the offing, when they are repeatedly told what they know to be falsethat, under the new health-care system that the administration is intent on establishing, benefits will be extended and costs reduced and no one will lose the coverage he already hasand when they discover that Medicare is to be gutted, that medical care is to be rationed, and that citizens who have no desire to purchase health insurance are going to be forced to do so.
> 
> In 1776, when George Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, he included a provision reflecting what the revolutionaries had learned from the long period of struggle between Court and Country in England and in America:* that no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. *What we are witnessing with the Tea Party movement is one of the periodic recurrences to fundamental principles that typify and revivify the American experiment in self-government...._
> 
> 
> How to Think About the Tea Party « Commentary Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think this is good piece, as far it goes, boedicca.  The Tea Party had its chance to reject the haters in its midst, and did not.
> 
> I appreciate the activism of any American...but for me, the Tea Party boat has long since sailed.
Click to expand...

^^^that is a lie maddy


----------



## The Infidel

Madeline said:


> Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?
> 
> I had a home in the GOP, and *I feel as if I am losing it*.



Agreed


----------



## manifold

Madeline said:


> I had a home in the GOP...


----------



## Madeline

manifold said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> I had a home in the GOP...
Click to expand...


Bite me, mani.


----------



## Anachronism

Madeline said:


> Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?
> 
> I had a home in the GOP, and I feel as if I am losing it.



I will suggest that you do as I do.... 

For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it. 

In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).


----------



## The Infidel




----------



## Immanuel

Toro said:


> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?



How does Maddie even know that they are not people just like her that hate people who associate with the "ideals" of the "tea party" and are not just out there trying to make those people look like jackasses?  I'm not saying they are, but there is no proof that they are not.

Immie


----------



## Madeline

Anachronism said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?
> 
> I had a home in the GOP, and I feel as if I am losing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will suggest that you do as I do....
> 
> For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it.
> 
> In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).
Click to expand...


This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.  

I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.


----------



## California Girl

Apparently, Maddie is 'more educated and more experienced' than I. She may be older - that I will admit.... She's closer to my Mom's age than mine..... and yet, I have rarely come across a less educated and less experienced woman in my (much shorter) life. 

You're a sad old bitch, Maddie. And you remain the only female on this board to call other women 'c*nts'. I feel sorry for you but you really are stupid.


----------



## Madeline

The Infidel said:


>



You have mad skillz there, The Infidel.

Impressive!


----------



## Stephanie

Madeline said:


> Anachronism said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?
> 
> I had a home in the GOP, and I feel as if I am losing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will suggest that you do as I do....
> 
> For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it.
> 
> In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> *I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.*  I just can't.
Click to expand...


Holy smokes,


----------



## Madeline

Stephanie said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anachronism said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will suggest that you do as I do....
> 
> For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it.
> 
> In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> *I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.*  I just can't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Holy smokes,
Click to expand...


Fine.  You disagree?

Prove it, Stephanie.

You cannot inform the dialogue here with an emoticon.


----------



## Mini 14

California Girl said:


> Apparently, Maddie is 'more educated and more experienced' than I. She may be older - that I will admit.... She's closer to my Mom's age than mine..... and yet, I have rarely come across a less educated and less experienced woman in my (much shorter) life.
> 
> You're a sad old bitch, Maddie. And you remain the only female on this board to call other women 'c*nts'. I feel sorry for you but you really are stupid.



School on the 4th of July.......


----------



## Stephanie

Madeline said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> *I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.*  I just can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy smokes,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fine.  You disagree?
> 
> Prove it, Stephanie.
> 
> *You cannot inform the dialogue here with an emoticon*.
Click to expand...


I thought it the only thing fitting for that stupid statement you made.


----------



## California Girl

Madeline said:


> Anachronism said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?
> 
> I had a home in the GOP, and I feel as if I am losing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will suggest that you do as I do....
> 
> For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it.
> 
> In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.
Click to expand...


What total bullshit. Why am I not surprised? The only reason you're so 'whoo hoo' for Obama is because he's black. You are so scared of race that you'll support a man who wants to trash the Constitution, just so you're 'acceptable' to the left. You cowardly little ignorant woman.


----------



## Dr.House

Madeline said:


> Anachronism said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thus my anger, Anachronism.  I am not not not a good Democrat....I agree with your points and I would add, they seem to think money is grown on trees.  I'm not a Libertarian...so where do I go?
> 
> I had a home in the GOP, and I feel as if I am losing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will suggest that you do as I do....
> 
> For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it.
> 
> In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.
Click to expand...


More broad-brushing by the OP....

color me "unsurprised" as you paint....


----------



## Madeline

Dr.House said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anachronism said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will suggest that you do as I do....
> 
> For the most part I IGNORE the elections. IF (and that's a HUGE "IF") there is a candidate that I feel I can vote FOR, I will go in and vote for them. If there isn't, I stay home. On an average ballot here in Massachusetts I MAY be able to vote for a candidate in as many as THREE elected offices on a twelve to fifteen office ballot some years. I ALWAYS vote on the ballot questions. I have gotten some ODD looks over the years when my ballot goes through the machine with only a few marks on it.
> 
> In the FIVE Presidential elections I've been allowed to vote in, I've voted Republican twice, Independent twice, and skipped that line once. In the future, I can just write my name in on the line if I choose (now that I'm over 35).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More broad-brushing by the OP....
> 
> color me "unsurprised" as you paint....
Click to expand...


Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.

Or not.

If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.


----------



## DiveCon

Madeline said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More broad-brushing by the OP....
> 
> color me "unsurprised" as you paint....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
Click to expand...

you have been DUPED


----------



## California Girl

DiveCon said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> More broad-brushing by the OP....
> 
> color me "unsurprised" as you paint....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you have been DUPED
Click to expand...


Maddie and Truthdon'tmatter.... a match made in heaven.... neither of them has the brain they were born with.


----------



## Madeline

DiveCon said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> More broad-brushing by the OP....
> 
> color me "unsurprised" as you paint....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you have been DUPED
Click to expand...


I have been insulted on this thread, but so far, no substantive replies.

I suspect there's a reason for that, Divey.


----------



## manifold

Is it just me, or does Maddie harbor a seriously unhealthy amount of hate?


----------



## manifold

Madeline said:


> I have been insulted on this thread, but so far, no substantive replies.
> 
> I suspect there's a reason for that, Divey.





I've seen more than a handful of substantive replies.  Some having to do with maligning a group based on the actions of a few.  Some having to do with rightly identifying your partisan hypocrisy, given that all parties have members similar to those in your cherry picked images.  And some astute enough to point out both.

Apparently you missed all of them, and I suspect there's a reason for that.


----------



## DiveCon

Madeline said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> you have been DUPED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have been insulted on this thread, but so far, no substantive replies.
> 
> I suspect there's a reason for that, Divey.
Click to expand...

maddy, more likely than not, all those images of "the things you hate about the" TEA Party are likely huffypuffy infiltrators
you have been DUPED


----------



## Madeline

DiveCon said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you have been DUPED
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been insulted on this thread, but so far, no substantive replies.
> 
> I suspect there's a reason for that, Divey.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> maddy, more likely than not, all those images of "the things you hate about the" TEA Party are likely huffypuffy infiltrators
> you have been DUPED
Click to expand...


Okie dokie, then, Divey.

No need for any discussion, I'll just assume all is well.


----------



## Anachronism

Madeline said:


> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.



Maddie,

I learned my lesson about politics the first time I was ever involved in it..... Way back in the Connecticut Gubenatorial race of 1990. I was in high school at the time, and taking an American Politics class. Part of the requirement for that class was to do a minimum of 40 hours of volunteer work for a political campaign (any one you wanted). I ended up working on the campaign of Independent Gubenatorial Candidate Lowell Weicker. Weicker's entire campaign essentially came down to ONE PLATFORM..... "No Income Tax". It was the primary, if not sole topic of the entire campaign. 

Both the R and the D were for creating one due to the mismanagement of the State's funds in the prior couple of administrations. Weicker was very adament that there were other, better ways to fix the problem.

We busted our asses and got him elected. Six weeks later we hung him in effigy in front of the Old State House after he went back on his word and signed a bill creating an Income Tax. 

The lesson I learned.... THEY'RE *ALL* SCUM!!! ALMOST *NONE* OF THEM ARE WORTHY OF HAVING *ANY* LEVEL OF FAITH PLACED IN THEM. THE ONLY *GOOD* POLITICIAN IS A ****** ONE!!! REGARDLESS OF PARTY.


----------



## Provocateur

Does this mean we should judge all black people because some are thugs and murderers?

Good to know that stereotyping is the play of the day for liberals.


----------



## simonsays

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



Great post. 

You should have seen O'Donnell on the 700 Club.

"oh sure, I love God. EVERYTHING I do is for God."

Completely canned response.


----------



## Provocateur

Madeline said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> you have been DUPED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have been insulted on this thread, but so far, no substantive replies.
> 
> I suspect there's a reason for that, Divey.
Click to expand...


I've been to Tea Party events.  No racism.

I'm guessing you are taking the word of other people who would like you to believe you are hated.  Sort of like a dysfunctional parent.


----------



## mudwhistle

Madeline said:


> The charge of "racism" is one that the Tea Party movement would like to shake. In the past, it has dismissed the label as only representing a few of its members on the fringe. However, the issue surfaced again on Wednesday when the NAACP -- which made news in July when it asked the Tea Party to repudiate racist elements within its ranks  issued a report that details associations between Tea Party organizations and hate groups in this country.
> 
> In a conference call with journalists, NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said that while there are policy disagreements, the civil rights group has "no problem with the Tea Party expressing their views in their great debate in our great democracy." The majority of Tea Party members "are sincere," and some are also in the NAACP, he said.
> "We do however have a problem when prominent Tea Party members" use Tea Party events to recruit people for white supremacist groups, Jealous said. The NAACP is urging leadership and members of the Tea Party movement to take additional steps to distance themselves from those Tea Party leaders "who espouse racist ideas, advocate violence, or are formally affiliated with white supremacist organizations."
> 
> He said the expulsion of Mark Williams of Tea Party Express was a step in the right direction, but said that Williams had been making controversial statements long before he was ousted for writing a mocking letter suggesting that blacks preferred life under slavery.
> 
> Some Tea Party leaders condemned the report, accusing the NAACP of abandoning its civil rights mission and of becoming a mouthpiece of the liberal left.
> In a statement before the report's release, Jealous said, "These groups and individuals are out there, and we ignore them at our own peril. They are speaking at Tea Party events, recruiting at rallies and in some cases remain in the Tea Party leadership itself. The danger is not that the majority of Tea Party members share their views, but that left unchecked, these extremists might indirectly influence the direction of the Tea Party and therefore the direction of our country: moving it backward and not forward."
> The report, co-authored by Devin Burghart and Leonard Zeskind of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, examines six Tea Party groups: FreedomWorks Tea Party, 1776 Tea Party, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots, ResistNet, and Tea Party Express.
> Zeskind, who was also on the conference call, said they began research a year ago when they noticed that the white supremacist group stormfront.org had "started a thread to move into the Tea Party." Burghart explained the report's methodology and data-gathering techniques, which included investigating campaign finance reports, printed and online literature, Tea Party membership, government documents and databases (including court cases) finance reports and corporate filings. They also interviewed activists.
> A document, "The Tea Party: The Racism Within," lists six "Profiles of Troubling Tea Partiers" with current or one-time ties to white nationalist organizations. It singles out Roan Garcia-Quintana, "advisor and media spokesman" for the 2010 Tax Day Tea Party in South Carolina. A member of ResistNet, he also serves on the National Board of Directors of the Council of Conservative Citizens, whose statement of principles opposes "all efforts to mix the races of mankind."
> 
> The NAACP said the decentralized nature of the Tea Party movement makes it difficult to police disparate groups for members who cross the line, but Jealous specifically called on Dick Armey of FreedomWorks and Sarah Palin, who "is out there with Tea Party Express," to take a more aggressive stand against intolerance.
> "Here we go again," Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, told the Kansas City Star. "This is typical of this liberal group's smear tactics." Phillips was an organizer of the Tea Party national conference in February.
> 
> Sal Russo, a California political consultant and chief strategist for the Tea Party Express, told the Star, "To attack a grassroots movement of this magnitude with sundry isolated incidents only goes to show the NAACP has abandoned the cause of civil rights for the advancement of liberal Democrat politics."
> 
> In addition to the report, the NAACP has been running Tea Party Tracker, a Web site in partnership with ThinkProgress, Media Matters and New Left Media set up to monitor "extremism in the Tea Party movement."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to 'Hate Groups'
Click to expand...


The NAACP is a hate group.


----------



## AllieBaba

Madeline said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> *I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.*  I just can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy smokes,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fine.  You disagree?
> 
> Prove it, Stephanie.
> 
> You cannot inform the dialogue here with an emoticon.
Click to expand...


She wasn't informing the dialogue, she was responding to an outrageous statement with ridicule.

The GOP has always been what it is. Nothing new, they've always been primarily white Christians, as have the dems.


----------



## mudwhistle

Madeline said:


>



I heard worse at a Code Pink rally last week. Much worse. Talking about killing Rush Limbaugh. Saying they're gonna pull out a Glock and cap someone. Cutting Clarence Thomas's toes off and feeding them to him. Sending him back to the fields. So much racism out of liberals. The hate and anger was obvious. I think you should just STFU.


----------



## mudwhistle

AllieBaba said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Holy smokes,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fine.  You disagree?
> 
> Prove it, Stephanie.
> 
> You cannot inform the dialogue here with an emoticon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She wasn't informing the dialogue, she was responding to an outrageous statement with ridicule.
> 
> The GOP has always been what it is. Nothing new, they've always been primarily white Christians, as have the dems.
Click to expand...


Used to be Democrats were all white Christians. Now they're Black Christians, Hollywood Nut-jobs, San Francisco Liberals, Massachusetts Liberals, and yes, white Christians in the South that continue to vote Democrat. Seems the richest in this country are Democrats, and the poorest trailer-park trash and ghetto drug-pushers are Democrats. The GOP seems to be most of the Middle Class.


----------



## Dr.House

Madeline said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> This ain't my way, Anachronism.  I been active in state and local politics for my whole life, and I have been a Republican for like 30 years now.
> 
> I cannot just sit by and watch the GOP morph into some sort of White Christian Party.  I just can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More broad-brushing by the OP....
> 
> color me "unsurprised" as you paint....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
Click to expand...


My replies are quite substantive...

I cannot be blamed for your failure to see the enlightenment...

You can continue to be a broad-brushing asshat if that's your desire...  I care not, but I reserve theright to call you on it...


----------



## Madeline

Dr.House said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> More broad-brushing by the OP....
> 
> color me "unsurprised" as you paint....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My replies are quite substantive...
> 
> I cannot be blamed for your failure to see the enlightenment...
> 
> You can continue to be a broad-brushing asshat if that's your desire...  I care not, but I reserve theright to call you on it...
Click to expand...


Fine by me.  I ain't changing my POV unless I am persuaded to do so, so we can just sit here and trade insults.

Gotta keep busy somehow, I suppose.


----------



## simonsays

Dr.House said:


> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...



And you estimate the number of these ephemeral tea partiers to be what?

If you count the numbers at Glenn Becks rally, how to you differentitiate them from the Christian Coalition?

How do we know that tea party isn't some PR / marketing gimmick from the RNC, rather than a supposed 'grass roots' group?


----------



## Madeline

mudwhistle said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fine.  You disagree?
> 
> Prove it, Stephanie.
> 
> You cannot inform the dialogue here with an emoticon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't informing the dialogue, she was responding to an outrageous statement with ridicule.
> 
> The GOP has always been what it is. Nothing new, they've always been primarily white Christians, as have the dems.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Used to be Democrats were all white Christians. Now they're Black Christians, Hollywood Nut-jobs, San Francisco Liberals, Massachusetts Liberals, and yes, white Christians in the South that continue to vote Democrat. Seems the richest in this country are Democrats, and the poorest trailer-park trash and ghetto drug-pushers are Democrats. The GOP seems to be most of the Middle Class.
Click to expand...


Linkiepoo, mudwhistle?  Most middle class people I know here (in Ohio) are Democrats.


----------



## Provocateur

Madeline said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't informing the dialogue, she was responding to an outrageous statement with ridicule.
> 
> The GOP has always been what it is. Nothing new, they've always been primarily white Christians, as have the dems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Used to be Democrats were all white Christians. Now they're Black Christians, Hollywood Nut-jobs, San Francisco Liberals, Massachusetts Liberals, and yes, white Christians in the South that continue to vote Democrat. Seems the richest in this country are Democrats, and the poorest trailer-park trash and ghetto drug-pushers are Democrats. The GOP seems to be most of the Middle Class.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Linkiepoo, mudwhistle?  Most middle class people I know here (in Ohio) are Democrats.
Click to expand...


I think this poll will likely satisfy you.  I'm assuming it is scientific and whatnot.

Which political party cares most about the middle class? - Yahoo! Answers


----------



## Madeline




----------



## AllieBaba

Provocateur said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Used to be Democrats were all white Christians. Now they're Black Christians, Hollywood Nut-jobs, San Francisco Liberals, Massachusetts Liberals, and yes, white Christians in the South that continue to vote Democrat. Seems the richest in this country are Democrats, and the poorest trailer-park trash and ghetto drug-pushers are Democrats. The GOP seems to be most of the Middle Class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Linkiepoo, mudwhistle?  Most middle class people I know here (in Ohio) are Democrats.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think this poll will likely satisfy you.  I'm assuming it is scientific and whatnot.
> 
> Which political party cares most about the middle class? - Yahoo! Answers
Click to expand...


Most of the middle class people I know are Republicans.

Go figure.


----------



## Dr.House

Madeline said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, you can dismiss my feelings if you wish, Dr. House.  I am not alone in how I see things, and a substantive reply might better serve your interests.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> If you have nothing to argue from, you say nothing, I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My replies are quite substantive...
> 
> I cannot be blamed for your failure to see the enlightenment...
> 
> You can continue to be a broad-brushing asshat if that's your desire...  I care not, but I reserve theright to call you on it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fine by me.  I ain't changing my POV unless I am persuaded to do so, so we can just sit here and trade insults.
> 
> Gotta keep busy somehow, I suppose.
Click to expand...


I don't care if you change your uneducated POV or not...  

I will continue to call you and any other "hater" out on it, though...


----------



## Dr.House

simonsays said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you estimate the number of these ephemeral tea partiers to be what?
> 
> If you count the numbers at Glenn Becks rally, how to you differentitiate them from the Christian Coalition?
> 
> How do we know that tea party isn't some PR / marketing gimmick from the RNC, rather than a supposed 'grass roots' group?
Click to expand...


The Conspiracy Theories sub-forum is over there  -------->


----------



## simonsays

Dr.House said:


> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you estimate the number of these ephemeral tea partiers to be what?
> 
> If you count the numbers at Glenn Becks rally, how to you differentitiate them from the Christian Coalition?
> 
> How do we know that tea party isn't some PR / marketing gimmick from the RNC, rather than a supposed 'grass roots' group?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Conspiracy Theories sub-forum is over there  -------->
Click to expand...


Percpetions can be managed by mass media and PR experts. The govmnt used a marketing firm to hire that girl to testify that babies were taken from incubators in Kuwait prior to the 1991 Iraq invasion, you recall.

Also many of the Town Halls on Health reform were staged to create "outrage" videos and were deliberately disruptive for effect.


----------



## Mini 14

Provocateur said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Used to be Democrats were all white Christians. Now they're Black Christians, Hollywood Nut-jobs, San Francisco Liberals, Massachusetts Liberals, and yes, white Christians in the South that continue to vote Democrat. Seems the richest in this country are Democrats, and the poorest trailer-park trash and ghetto drug-pushers are Democrats. The GOP seems to be most of the Middle Class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Linkiepoo, mudwhistle?  Most middle class people I know here (in Ohio) are Democrats.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think this poll will likely satisfy you.  I'm assuming it is scientific and whatnot.
> 
> Which political party cares most about the middle class? - Yahoo! Answers
Click to expand...


Yahoo Answers?

Really?

You do know how it works, right?


----------



## Dr.House

simonsays said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you estimate the number of these ephemeral tea partiers to be what?
> 
> If you count the numbers at Glenn Becks rally, how to you differentitiate them from the Christian Coalition?
> 
> How do we know that tea party isn't some PR / marketing gimmick from the RNC, rather than a supposed 'grass roots' group?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Conspiracy Theories sub-forum is over there  -------->
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Percpetions can be managed by mass media and PR experts. The govmnt used a marketing firm to hire that girl to testify that babies were taken from incubators in Kuwait prior to the 1991 Iraq invasion, you recall.
> 
> Also many of the Town Halls on Health reform were staged to create "outrage" videos and were deliberately disruptive for effect.
Click to expand...


You'll fit right in over there ------->


----------



## California Girl

Dr.House said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> My replies are quite substantive...
> 
> I cannot be blamed for your failure to see the enlightenment...
> 
> You can continue to be a broad-brushing asshat if that's your desire...  I care not, but I reserve theright to call you on it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fine by me.  I ain't changing my POV unless I am persuaded to do so, so we can just sit here and trade insults.
> 
> Gotta keep busy somehow, I suppose.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if you change your uneducated POV or not...
> 
> I will continue to call you and any other "hater" out on it, though...
Click to expand...


Maddie howls like a banshee about these mythical 'extremists' and 'haters' in the TEA Parties... and it's fine for her to 'hate' them. What a hypocritical old bitch.


----------



## Dr.House

California Girl said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fine by me.  I ain't changing my POV unless I am persuaded to do so, so we can just sit here and trade insults.
> 
> Gotta keep busy somehow, I suppose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care if you change your uneducated POV or not...
> 
> I will continue to call you and any other "hater" out on it, though...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maddie howls like a banshee about these mythical 'extremists' and 'haters' in the TEA Parties... and it's fine for her to 'hate' them. What a hypocritical old bitch.
Click to expand...


'Haters' tend to run in uneducated packs...  Sadly, they don't care that they are relying on bogus information from biased sources...  Additionally, they're first in line to complain about FNC or Rush Limbaugh....lol  

Hypocrites indeed....


----------



## Provocateur

Mini 14 said:


> Provocateur said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Linkiepoo, mudwhistle?  Most middle class people I know here (in Ohio) are Democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think this poll will likely satisfy you.  I'm assuming it is scientific and whatnot.
> 
> Which political party cares most about the middle class? - Yahoo! Answers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yahoo Answers?
> 
> Really?
> 
> You do know how it works, right?
Click to expand...


What?  You mean the vote of 100% doesn't mean much if only one person voted?


----------



## simonsays

Dr.House said:


> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Conspiracy Theories sub-forum is over there  -------->
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Percpetions can be managed by mass media and PR experts. The govmnt used a marketing firm to hire that girl to testify that babies were taken from incubators in Kuwait prior to the 1991 Iraq invasion, you recall.
> 
> Also many of the Town Halls on Health reform were staged to create "outrage" videos and were deliberately disruptive for effect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You'll fit right in over there ------->
Click to expand...


*Bush Spent $1.6 Bil. on 'Spin'
By Richard Williamson*

"DALLAS- The Bush Administration spent $1.4 billion in taxpayer dollars on 137 contracts with advertising agencies over the past two-and-a-half years, according to a Government Accountability Office report released by House Democrats today"

"Ketchum was embroiled in a scandal last year when it was revealed that the Department of Education had paid commentator Armstrong Williams $250,000 to promote President Bush's No Child Left Behind initiative. There was no suggestion of impropriety for most of the contracts, however. GSD&M, for example, has handled advertising for the U.S. Air Force for several years, an account it won through a traditional government review."

"Trends in spending on PR and ad contracts were not documented, but a prior study by the minority staff of the Government Reform Committee found that spending on public relations contracts rose rapidly under the Bush administration. That report found that spending on contracts with public relations firms had increased to $88 million in 2004 from $39 million in 2000, an increase of 128 percent."

Bush Spent $1.6 Bil. on 'Spin' | North America > United States from AllBusiness.com


----------



## California Girl

simonsays said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you estimate the number of these ephemeral tea partiers to be what?
> 
> If you count the numbers at Glenn Becks rally, how to you differentitiate them from the Christian Coalition?
> 
> How do we know that tea party isn't some PR / marketing gimmick from the RNC, rather than a supposed 'grass roots' group?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Conspiracy Theories sub-forum is over there  -------->
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Percpetions can be managed by mass media and PR experts. The govmnt used a marketing firm to hire that girl to testify that babies were taken from incubators in Kuwait prior to the 1991 Iraq invasion, you recall.
> 
> Also many of the Town Halls on Health reform were staged to create "outrage" videos and were deliberately disruptive for effect.
Click to expand...


The original TEA Parties date from 2007 - thus blowing the theory that they were a backlash to Obama, the black guy, the Muslim, yadda, yadda, yadda. They are groups of people who think they're 'Taxed Enough Already'. 

Seriously, if you want to find out about the TEA Parties, why not read some legitimate (and, by legitimate, I mean unbiased) information. There's plenty around.... there is also a lot of total bullshit.... which is what Maddie bases her 'opinion' on.


----------



## California Girl

simonsays said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> Percpetions can be managed by mass media and PR experts. The govmnt used a marketing firm to hire that girl to testify that babies were taken from incubators in Kuwait prior to the 1991 Iraq invasion, you recall.
> 
> Also many of the Town Halls on Health reform were staged to create "outrage" videos and were deliberately disruptive for effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'll fit right in over there ------->
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Bush Spent $1.6 Bil. on 'Spin'
> By Richard Williamson*
> 
> "DALLAS- The Bush Administration spent $1.4 billion in taxpayer dollars on 137 contracts with advertising agencies over the past two-and-a-half years, according to a Government Accountability Office report released by House Democrats today"
> 
> "Ketchum was embroiled in a scandal last year when it was revealed that the Department of Education had paid commentator Armstrong Williams $250,000 to promote President Bush's No Child Left Behind initiative. There was no suggestion of impropriety for most of the contracts, however. GSD&M, for example, has handled advertising for the U.S. Air Force for several years, an account it won through a traditional government review."
> 
> "Trends in spending on PR and ad contracts were not documented, but a prior study by the minority staff of the Government Reform Committee found that spending on public relations contracts rose rapidly under the Bush administration. That report found that spending on contracts with public relations firms had increased to $88 million in 2004 from $39 million in 2000, an increase of 128 percent."
> 
> Bush Spent $1.6 Bil. on 'Spin' | North America > United States from AllBusiness.com
Click to expand...


So? You think Obama is different? He's not. And it didn't start with Bush. And every damned government in the western world does exactly the same thing.


----------



## AllieBaba

California Girl said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fine by me.  I ain't changing my POV unless I am persuaded to do so, so we can just sit here and trade insults.
> 
> Gotta keep busy somehow, I suppose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care if you change your uneducated POV or not...
> 
> I will continue to call you and any other "hater" out on it, though...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maddie howls like a banshee about these mythical 'extremists' and 'haters' in the TEA Parties... and it's fine for her to 'hate' them. What a hypocritical old bitch.
Click to expand...


Bitches really piss me off! Lol..


----------



## simonsays

California Girl said:


> So? You think Obama is different? He's not. And it didn't start with Bush. And every damned government in the western world does exactly the same thing.



Thats all the tea party is. A focus group being marketed to by elites, its not grass roots.


----------



## AllieBaba

simonsays said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So? You think Obama is different? He's not. And it didn't start with Bush. And every damned government in the western world does exactly the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all the tea party is. A focus group being marketed to by elites, its not grass roots.
Click to expand...


Lol...spoken like a true elitist.

Got some factoids to back that up, bro?


----------



## simonsays

AllieBaba said:


> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So? You think Obama is different? He's not. And it didn't start with Bush. And every damned government in the western world does exactly the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all the tea party is. A focus group being marketed to by elites, its not grass roots.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lol...spoken like a true elitist.
> 
> Got some factoids to back that up, bro?
Click to expand...


Read that article about the Koch bros. ?


----------



## California Girl

simonsays said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all the tea party is. A focus group being marketed to by elites, its not grass roots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol...spoken like a true elitist.
> 
> Got some factoids to back that up, bro?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Read that article about the Koch bros. ?
Click to expand...


  Idiot.... banned idiot.


----------



## Dr.House

California Girl said:


> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lol...spoken like a true elitist.
> 
> Got some factoids to back that up, bro?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read that article about the Koch bros. ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Idiot.... banned idiot.
Click to expand...

lol - that was quick...


----------



## California Girl

Dr.House said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> simonsays said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read that article about the Koch bros. ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Idiot.... banned idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol - that was quick...
Click to expand...


Fast ban hammer. Musta been EZ. That woman is a demon with a ban hammer.


----------



## The Infidel

mudwhistle said:


> I heard worse at a Code Pink rally last week. Much worse. Talking about killing Rush Limbaugh. Saying they're gonna pull out a Glock and cap someone. Cutting Clarence Thomas's toes off and feeding them to him. Sending him back to the fields. So much racism out of liberals. The hate and anger was obvious. I think you should just STFU.








































































































[/quote]




































*Oh... and did I mention *


----------



## Quantum Windbag

You should despise these people.


The funny thing is there is not a single incidence of violence associated with the Tea Party, yet the left routinely resorts to violence and mayhem without ever being called on it.


----------



## TacomaJPP

Madeline said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my! This changes my perspective completely! I've just realized that the US *isn't* spending itself into oblivion and that Obama and the Liberal Democrats are our saviors!
> 
> That settles it, I'm voting Democrat in 2012!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, I was bored so I decided to stir the pot.
> 
> I am looking at being backed into a corner:  either I agree we should spend ourselves into oblivion or I sign on for hate.
> 
> I cannot agree to *either*  one.  Where's MY party?  Where's MY candidate?
Click to expand...


Sign on for hate? No, sorry, that's not what it is about. You are swallowing too many soundbytes from CNN or something. The tea party is about changing the reckless ways of our government and asking for it to be smaller and more responsible, period. Anyone doing or saying anything different is on the fringe....and there is a fringe to every establishment.


----------



## uscitizen

Toro said:


> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?



I would say about 25% of the TP'ers.
And 90% of the ones I know personally.


----------



## uscitizen

Quantum Windbag said:


> You should despise these people.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn0HdZlIDKQ
> 
> The funny thing is there is not a single incidence of violence associated with the Tea Party, yet the left routinely resorts to violence and mayhem without ever being called on it.



Of course not aside from stomping a woman on the head.

They are the types who try to get others to do their work for them.


----------



## Dr.House

uscitizen said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say about 25% of the TP'ers.
> And 90% of the ones I know personally.
Click to expand...


Welcome to the OP's fantasy world....

Try educating yourself...


----------



## TacomaJPP

uscitizen said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say about 25% of the TP'ers.
> And 90% of the ones I know personally.
Click to expand...


Funny, I've been to three Tea Party rallies. I saw absolutely no reckless, racist, or other type of wacko behavior by the tea party crowd. However, there were some (<5) liberals protesters protesting our rally and they were screaming obsenities and making obnoxious and inappropriate gestures. Now, do I assume all liberals are like that? No. That would be an idiotic assumption, but it happened at 2 of 3 events I attended.

Again, wackos exist everywhere, amongst every group...I tend to think there are more on the left than the right...I mean, just watch what happens every election cycle when the DNC rolls into town...complete chaos in the streets. But that's just what I've seen.


----------



## The Infidel

TacomaJPP said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say about 25% of the TP'ers.
> And 90% of the ones I know personally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny, I've been to three Tea Party rallies. I saw absolutely no reckless, racist, or other type of wacko behavior by the tea party crowd. However, there were some (<5) liberals protesters protesting our rally and they were screaming obsenities and making obnoxious and inappropriate gestures. Now, do I assume all liberals are like that? No. That would be an idiotic assumption, but it happened at 2 of 3 events I attended.
> 
> Again, wackos exist everywhere, amongst every group...I tend to think there are more on the left than the right...I mean, just watch what happens every election cycle when the DNC rolls into town...complete chaos in the streets. But that's just what I've seen.
Click to expand...


We're just an easy target.

After all, the president feels the same way as the OP.


----------



## uscitizen

Dr.House said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those guys are uneducated idiotic brain-dead morons.
> 
> But do they really represent the typical supporter of the Tea Party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say about 25% of the TP'ers.
> And 90% of the ones I know personally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Welcome to the OP's fantasy world....
> 
> Try educating yourself...
Click to expand...


I am well educated on the Tea Baggers I know.  Around 1/2 dozen of them did go to the big DC Beck/Palin rally.
They are all racist as heck.

I am far more qwualified than you to comment on the ones I know personally.
2 of Them one day told me serious as hell that they truely believed Obama was the antichrist.

I have not asked the others about the antichrist thing..  It is just too disapointing in my fellow man to find out.


----------



## The Infidel

uscitizen said:


> I am well educated on the Tea Baggers I know.  Around 1/2 dozen of them did go to the big DC Beck/Palin rally.
> They are all racist as heck.
> 
> I am far more qwualified than you to comment on the ones I know personally.
> 2 of Them one day told me serious as hell that they truely believed Obama was the antichrist.
> 
> I have not asked the others about the antichrist thing..  It is just too disapointing in my fellow man to find out.



Sounds to me like you are hanging around the wrong kind of folks bro.... not a one of my friends are racists, and I have a bunch of friends.
Yes, I do know some racists, but they are not anywhere near my circle of friends.


----------



## Dr.House

uscitizen said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would say about 25% of the TP'ers.
> And 90% of the ones I know personally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the OP's fantasy world....
> 
> Try educating yourself...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am well educated on the Tea Baggers I know.  Around 1/2 dozen of them did go to the big DC Beck/Palin rally.
> They are all racist as heck.
> 
> I am far more qwualified than you to comment on the ones I know personally.
> 2 of Them one day told me serious as hell that they truely believed Obama was the antichrist.
> 
> I have not asked the others about the antichrist thing..  It is just too disapointing in my fellow man to find out.
Click to expand...


Apparently you like to broad brush with the OP...  The Tea Party is more than your little sphere of experience in your own little world... 

If you expand your small little world of experience, you actually might educate yourself...  It won't happen if you continue to plug your ears and sing "la-la-la"....

You and the OP seem to be convinced by your own personal prejudices...  That's fine... Ignorant, but that's how people who have made up their minds usually roll...


----------



## The Infidel




----------



## JBeukema




----------



## hortysir

Madeline said:


>





Madeline said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb_yqcxiVlY





Madeline said:


> The charge of "racism" is one that the Tea Party movement would like to shake. In the past, it has dismissed the label as only representing a few of its members on the fringe. However, the issue surfaced again on Wednesday when the NAACP -- which made news in July when it asked the Tea Party to repudiate racist elements within its ranks  issued a report that details associations between Tea Party organizations and hate groups in this country.
> 
> In a conference call with journalists, NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said that while there are policy disagreements, the civil rights group has "no problem with the Tea Party expressing their views in their great debate in our great democracy." The majority of Tea Party members "are sincere," and some are also in the NAACP, he said.
> "We do however have a problem when prominent Tea Party members" use Tea Party events to recruit people for white supremacist groups, Jealous said. The NAACP is urging leadership and members of the Tea Party movement to take additional steps to distance themselves from those Tea Party leaders "who espouse racist ideas, advocate violence, or are formally affiliated with white supremacist organizations."
> 
> He said the expulsion of Mark Williams of Tea Party Express was a step in the right direction, but said that Williams had been making controversial statements long before he was ousted for writing a mocking letter suggesting that blacks preferred life under slavery.
> 
> Some Tea Party leaders condemned the report, accusing the NAACP of abandoning its civil rights mission and of becoming a mouthpiece of the liberal left.
> In a statement before the report's release, Jealous said, "These groups and individuals are out there, and we ignore them at our own peril. They are speaking at Tea Party events, recruiting at rallies and in some cases remain in the Tea Party leadership itself. The danger is not that the majority of Tea Party members share their views, but that left unchecked, these extremists might indirectly influence the direction of the Tea Party and therefore the direction of our country: moving it backward and not forward."
> The report, co-authored by Devin Burghart and Leonard Zeskind of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, examines six Tea Party groups: FreedomWorks Tea Party, 1776 Tea Party, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots, ResistNet, and Tea Party Express.
> Zeskind, who was also on the conference call, said they began research a year ago when they noticed that the white supremacist group stormfront.org had "started a thread to move into the Tea Party." Burghart explained the report's methodology and data-gathering techniques, which included investigating campaign finance reports, printed and online literature, Tea Party membership, government documents and databases (including court cases) finance reports and corporate filings. They also interviewed activists.
> A document, "The Tea Party: The Racism Within," lists six "Profiles of Troubling Tea Partiers" with current or one-time ties to white nationalist organizations. It singles out Roan Garcia-Quintana, "advisor and media spokesman" for the 2010 Tax Day Tea Party in South Carolina. A member of ResistNet, he also serves on the National Board of Directors of the Council of Conservative Citizens, whose statement of principles opposes "all efforts to mix the races of mankind."
> 
> The NAACP said the decentralized nature of the Tea Party movement makes it difficult to police disparate groups for members who cross the line, but Jealous specifically called on Dick Armey of FreedomWorks and Sarah Palin, who "is out there with Tea Party Express," to take a more aggressive stand against intolerance.
> "Here we go again," Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, told the Kansas City Star. "This is typical of this liberal group's smear tactics." Phillips was an organizer of the Tea Party national conference in February.
> 
> Sal Russo, a California political consultant and chief strategist for the Tea Party Express, told the Star, "To attack a grassroots movement of this magnitude with sundry isolated incidents only goes to show the NAACP has abandoned the cause of civil rights for the advancement of liberal Democrat politics."
> 
> In addition to the report, the NAACP has been running Tea Party Tracker, a Web site in partnership with ThinkProgress, Media Matters and New Left Media set up to monitor "extremism in the Tea Party movement."
> 
> 
> 
> NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to 'Hate Groups'
Click to expand...

O
B
S
E
S
S
E
D

How much time did you spend finding and then c/p'ing all this bullshit,Maddy??


----------



## mudwhistle

hortysir said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb_yqcxiVlY
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The charge of "racism" is one that the Tea Party movement would like to shake. In the past, it has dismissed the label as only representing a few of its members on the fringe. However, the issue surfaced again on Wednesday when the NAACP -- which made news in July when it asked the Tea Party to repudiate racist elements within its ranks  issued a report that details associations between Tea Party organizations and hate groups in this country.
> 
> In a conference call with journalists, NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said that while there are policy disagreements, the civil rights group has "no problem with the Tea Party expressing their views in their great debate in our great democracy." The majority of Tea Party members "are sincere," and some are also in the NAACP, he said.
> "We do however have a problem when prominent Tea Party members" use Tea Party events to recruit people for white supremacist groups, Jealous said. The NAACP is urging leadership and members of the Tea Party movement to take additional steps to distance themselves from those Tea Party leaders "who espouse racist ideas, advocate violence, or are formally affiliated with white supremacist organizations."
> 
> He said the expulsion of Mark Williams of Tea Party Express was a step in the right direction, but said that Williams had been making controversial statements long before he was ousted for writing a mocking letter suggesting that blacks preferred life under slavery.
> 
> Some Tea Party leaders condemned the report, accusing the NAACP of abandoning its civil rights mission and of becoming a mouthpiece of the liberal left.
> In a statement before the report's release, Jealous said, "These groups and individuals are out there, and we ignore them at our own peril. They are speaking at Tea Party events, recruiting at rallies and in some cases remain in the Tea Party leadership itself. The danger is not that the majority of Tea Party members share their views, but that left unchecked, these extremists might indirectly influence the direction of the Tea Party and therefore the direction of our country: moving it backward and not forward."
> The report, co-authored by Devin Burghart and Leonard Zeskind of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, examines six Tea Party groups: FreedomWorks Tea Party, 1776 Tea Party, Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Patriots, ResistNet, and Tea Party Express.
> Zeskind, who was also on the conference call, said they began research a year ago when they noticed that the white supremacist group stormfront.org had "started a thread to move into the Tea Party." Burghart explained the report's methodology and data-gathering techniques, which included investigating campaign finance reports, printed and online literature, Tea Party membership, government documents and databases (including court cases) finance reports and corporate filings. They also interviewed activists.
> A document, "The Tea Party: The Racism Within," lists six "Profiles of Troubling Tea Partiers" with current or one-time ties to white nationalist organizations. It singles out Roan Garcia-Quintana, "advisor and media spokesman" for the 2010 Tax Day Tea Party in South Carolina. A member of ResistNet, he also serves on the National Board of Directors of the Council of Conservative Citizens, whose statement of principles opposes "all efforts to mix the races of mankind."
> 
> The NAACP said the decentralized nature of the Tea Party movement makes it difficult to police disparate groups for members who cross the line, but Jealous specifically called on Dick Armey of FreedomWorks and Sarah Palin, who "is out there with Tea Party Express," to take a more aggressive stand against intolerance.
> "Here we go again," Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, told the Kansas City Star. "This is typical of this liberal group's smear tactics." Phillips was an organizer of the Tea Party national conference in February.
> 
> Sal Russo, a California political consultant and chief strategist for the Tea Party Express, told the Star, "To attack a grassroots movement of this magnitude with sundry isolated incidents only goes to show the NAACP has abandoned the cause of civil rights for the advancement of liberal Democrat politics."
> 
> In addition to the report, the NAACP has been running Tea Party Tracker, a Web site in partnership with ThinkProgress, Media Matters and New Left Media set up to monitor "extremism in the Tea Party movement."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to 'Hate Groups'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> O
> B
> S
> E
> S
> S
> E
> D
> 
> How much time did you spend finding and then c/p'ing all this bullshit,Maddy??
Click to expand...


How long did it take for you to type OBSESSED horizontally????


----------



## DiveCon

mudwhistle said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to 'Hate Groups'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> O
> B
> S
> E
> S
> S
> E
> D
> 
> How much time did you spend finding and then c/p'ing all this bullshit,Maddy??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How long did it take for you to type OBSESSED horizontally????
Click to expand...

um, you mean vertically


----------



## strollingbones

Dr.House said:


> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...



unless that entire group is a liberal one...

blow it out your ear house...you know damn well you engage in this and your ilk engage in this....


----------



## editec

I think it is not entirely unreasonable to say that there is a very strong RACIST streak in the movement.

Now I do not think that everybody in the TP movement is a racist, but they certainly seem sanguine when overt racists show up in big numbers during their demonstrations.

As long as the hate (racist or otherwise) is directed at OBAMA and democrats generally, pretty much every insult (racist or otherwise) is tolerated by the TP players.


----------



## Stephanie

yeah yeah, everyone in the Tea Party or anyone who is against the Obama are all Racist.

This is their one THING they can fall back on with Electing the Obama. Don't think it's not Planned.


----------



## DiveCon

editec said:


> I think it is not entirely unreasonable to say that there is a very strong RACIST streak in the movement.
> 
> Now I do not think that everybody in the TP movement is a racist, but they certainly seem sanguine when overt racists show up in big numbers during their demonstrations.
> 
> As long as the hate (racist or otherwise) is directed at OBAMA and democrats generally, pretty much every insult (racist or otherwise) is tolerated by the TP players.


thats patently wrong


----------



## California Girl

editec said:


> I think it is not entirely unreasonable to say that there is a very strong RACIST streak in the movement.
> 
> Now I do not think that everybody in the TP movement is a racist, but they certainly seem sanguine when overt racists show up in big numbers during their demonstrations.
> 
> As long as the hate (racist or otherwise) is directed at OBAMA and democrats generally, pretty much every insult (racist or otherwise) is tolerated by the TP players.



I think you lack the ability to think critically about the TEA Parties, and prefer to take your 'opinion' from the MSM. There is no evidence of anything other than a very small minority of racism in the TEA Parties.... in fact, you're likely to find more racism at one of Al Sharpton's rallies but no one rants about those.


----------



## peach174

How about the fact that tea parters like Rep. Allen West from Florida, that the GOP had him as key note speaker at the CPAC convention just recently, and that he addressed this very thing in his speech.


----------



## DiveCon

peach174 said:


> How about the fact that tea parters like Rep. Allen West from Florida, that the *GOP had him as key note speaker at the Gop convention* just recently, and that he addressed this very thing in his speech.


that was CPAC, not the GOP


----------



## peach174

Ok  CPAC  
I corrected it. My bad.


----------



## strollingbones

of course now i have a neg from pale rider.....this is what the god fearing conservative macho man had to say:

	This Is Why I Despise... 	02-14-2011 11:58 AM 	Pale Rider 	Nasty, pitiful, dirty, low life, back woods, stupid old witch.

what you got to love is he didnt post on the thread....just use it to name call etc.  what a fine example of a conservative man he is


----------



## AllieBaba

What the hell is he talking about? What article?


----------



## Dr.House

strollingbones said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unless that entire group is a liberal one...
> 
> blow it out your ear house...you know damn well you engage in this and your ilk engage in this....
Click to expand...


bullshit...  blow it out your own ear...

I don't broad brush...  I qualify my statements...

I can't control "my ilk"...


----------



## AllieBaba

editec said:


> I think it is not entirely unreasonable to say that there is a very strong RACIST streak in the movement.
> 
> Now I do not think that everybody in the TP movement is a racist, but they certainly seem sanguine when overt racists show up in big numbers during their demonstrations.
> 
> As long as the hate (racist or otherwise) is directed at OBAMA and democrats generally, pretty much every insult (racist or otherwise) is tolerated by the TP players.



You're full of shit.

Please provide a (real) example of racists showing up in big numbers and the sanguinuity of the tea partiers when it happened.


----------



## AllieBaba

Dr.House said:


> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unless that entire group is a liberal one...
> 
> blow it out your ear house...you know damn well you engage in this and your ilk engage in this....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> bullshit...  blow it out your own ear...
> 
> I don't broad brush...  I qualify my statements...
> 
> I can't control "my ilk"...
Click to expand...



Who are your ilk, anyway? I wasn't aware you had ilk.


----------



## DiveCon

Dr.House said:


> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> I despise broad brushing asshats who paint an entire group with the actions of a few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unless that entire group is a liberal one...
> 
> blow it out your ear house...you know damn well you engage in this and your ilk engage in this....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> bullshit...  blow it out your own ear...
> 
> I don't broad brush...  I qualify my statements...
> 
> I can't control "my ilk"...
Click to expand...

you have an "Ilk"?

i want an "ilk" 
how can i get one?


----------



## AllieBaba

Perhaps you and House can be each others' ilks.


----------



## Dr.House

DiveCon said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> 
> unless that entire group is a liberal one...
> 
> blow it out your ear house...you know damn well you engage in this and your ilk engage in this....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bullshit...  blow it out your own ear...
> 
> I don't broad brush...  I qualify my statements...
> 
> I can't control "my ilk"...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you have an "Ilk"?
> 
> i want an "ilk"
> how can i get one?
Click to expand...


You send away for it to Grand Rapids, Michigan....

Allow 3 weeks for delivery...

Comes with a stylish carrying case....


----------



## Dr.House

AllieBaba said:


> Perhaps you and House can be each others' ilks.



Would you be my Ilkentine?...


----------



## signelect

What a difference a couple of years make.  Bush was a child killer and the Reps were ruining the country now its 180 degrees opposite, same song different verse.  I only wish we could find an American to be President.  Someone who truly believes that the founding fathers were on to something, it worked for about 300 years before it jumped the track.


----------



## AllieBaba

Dr.House said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you and House can be each others' ilks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you be my Ilkentine?...
Click to expand...


I need ilk as well, so yes, I will....


----------



## Provocateur

Does Madeline believe in spreading the wealth, reparations, etc.?  Being new, I honestly don't know the answer.

If so, I think that she will despise the Tea Party regardless the signs that are carried.


----------



## MonsterZero

mudwhistle said:


> I heard worse at a Code Pink rally last week. Much worse. Talking about killing Rush Limbaugh. Saying they're gonna pull out a Glock and cap someone. Cutting Clarence Thomas's toes off and feeding them to him. Sending him back to the fields. So much racism out of liberals. The hate and anger was obvious. I think you should just STFU.



These folks must be FBI or police spies.


----------



## Anachronism

signelect said:


> I only wish we could find an American to be President.  Someone who truly believes that the founding fathers were on to something, it worked for about 300 years before it jumped the track.



No it didn't. It worked for less than a Century. 1860 was the end of AMERICA, to be truly specific. Everything since then has simply been a hollow shell of what this country was supposed to be.


----------



## JamesInFlorida

Sure there are some racists in the Tea Party, but I've met racist Democrats, racist Libertarians, racist apolitical people too.

*Every group *is going to have some racists within it. That's an unfortunate part of the human experience.


----------



## debater

Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?


----------



## Madeline

debater said:


> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?



In all fairness, it isn't easy to tell who is and is not in the Tea Party, and I suspect there's a wide divergence among those who view themselves as belonging as to what this movement is about.

But yes, many clearly do support such candidates.  I think many people are fearful about the state of the economy and desperately want things to improve.  They have come to believe that our pain is caused because government impedes business, and that if business were less regulated, had to pay lower taxes, and were better received by government, the economy would boom.....and there's some truth in this.

The problem is, the economy that would result would have fewer jobs for middle class, educated people, as they'd ship more off-shore.  There'd be less made here, as labor is cheaper elsewhere and workplace safety laws are less stringent elsewhere.   It can be almost impossible to convince a person making $40k a year that his interests and those of the Billionaries are not the same.


----------



## code1211

debater said:


> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?





The TEA Party is an acronym for the Taxed Enough Already Party.

Under the umbrella of this very loosely organized group are all kinds of different people with all kinds of different agendas although they are mostly against the intrusion of government into the lives of citizens.  

As I understand this group of groups, there is no national organization that represents all of the supporters.  There is no particular person that speaks for all of the groups that claim affinity with the ideas and there is no particular defined Party, in the sense of the Dems or the Reps, that organizes this group into controlled voting blocks.

That said, what "bidding" and "support" are you specifically referring to?


----------



## William Joyce

Well, I think that's conservative issue momentum, basically, not necessarily what a tea partier would support.  Offshoring jobs is something conservatives don't care enough about, and they should.  If the GOP would stick up for the working man just a LITTLE BIT MORE, we'd have some progress.  Right now, they barely give it a nod.  Lower taxes is great, but there needs to be much more focus on the everyday person who works for a living and his/her family.

In other words, I agree with _The American Conservative_ magazine when it said, "there is nothing 'conservative' about a society where the CEO makes 29 times what a worker at the company makes."


----------



## GStarz

debater said:


> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?



The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?


----------



## Annie

debater said:


> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?



I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics. 

Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.


----------



## debater

GStarz said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
Click to expand...


Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.

So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.


----------



## debater

Annie said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
Click to expand...


The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.


----------



## Wingsofwind

debater said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
Click to expand...


If the Tea Party is the reason for this then the 2 party system may become a 3 party system. Or.....


----------



## Madeline

Annie said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
Click to expand...



Some Tea Party supporters seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the interests of the mega-wealthy (pass the tax cuts for the rich or else) and those of the middle class, Annie.  They seem to believe the economic downturn was not caused by Wall Street and the banks, but by heavy government regulation and taxation.  That to reverse this downturn, we need only remove this impediment.

They seem to forget, the LACK of government regulation allowed BP to install a defective well in the Gulf, allowed Bernie Madoff to steal billions, allowed Big Ag to sell bad food, etc.  They also seem not to notice how jobs are hemorraging out of this country, or that importing cheap Chinese goods may not be best for us all. 

Some people seem to get an emotional high out of perceiving themselves as aligned with the mega-wealthy.....and will fight for their interests even at the cost of their own, to sate this craving.

JMO, of course.


----------



## Flagwavrusa

Madeline said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Some Tea Party supporters seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the interests of the mega-wealthy (pass the tax cuts for the rich or else) and those of the middle class, Annie.  They seem to believe the economic downturn was not caused by Wall Street and the banks, but by heavy government regulation and taxation.  That to reverse this downturn, we need only remove this impediment.
> 
> They seem to forget, the LACK of government regulation allowed BP to install a defective well in the Gulf, allowed Bernie Madoff to steal billions, allowed Big Ag to sell bad food, etc.  They also seem not to notice how jobs are hemorraging out of this country, or that importing cheap Chinese goods may not be best for us all.
> 
> Some people seem to get an emotional high out of perceiving themselves as aligned with the mega-wealthy.....and will fight for their interests even at the cost of their own, to sate this craving.
> 
> JMO, of course.
Click to expand...


Here's an outline of the Tea Party Agenda:

1) All forms of government must abide by the boundaries set forth in state and federal constitutions.

2) All pork and earmarks in the stimulus, omnibus bills, and bailouts must be reversed and repealed. The national budget must be balanced. Spending cuts, not increased taxation should be used to balance the budget.

3) Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness implies personal responsibility, not handouts, free-enterprise and capitalism, not government controlled economies. Some people choose to be irresponsible (and of course some fall on hard times due to circumstances), but it is not the responsibility of the general public, vis-a-vis government intervention, to guarantee or bailout irresponsibility and failure. Private individuals and organizations give out of compassion and generosity, not compulsion through taxation. laws, and pork barrel projects.

4) ALL elected and appointed officials are under the employment and serve at the will of We the People.

5) Excessive tax burdens kill prosperity.

6) Excessive national debt is generational theft, and stealing the future of our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

7) Neither major political party is "clean" on these issues. Both Democrats and Republicans have taxed excessively and neither have restrained the hand of government effectively. There are certainly individual representatives who have been faithful to their constituents and to the Constitution. However, too many are engaged in protecting their congressional positions and turf. The majority of government officials have insulated themselves from the people they serve, and hold themselves above the law. We are simply saying, "No, you aren't above the law".

8 ) The American public at large is ignorant of the purpose of government, the founding documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Federalist Papers. As a result, they allow politicians to sell them false hope and "rights" and "entitlements" that are not guaranteed by the Constitution. By educating the American people on the foundations of our history, we hope to bring sanity to the election and legislative processes.

9) As a group, we are appalled at the audaciousness and arrogance of our government in the last few years, particularly the proposals and bills passed in the last few months, despite massive public disapproval.

I don't see anything on the agenda about advancing the interests of rich people or large corporations.


----------



## Madeline

Says you.  The massive support you guys gave to pressure Obama into approving tax cuts for the richest Americans says otherwise.

As does the "support BP" campaigns y'all mounted.

You think no one is taking notes?


----------



## Flagwavrusa

Madeline said:


> Says you.  The massive support you guys gave to pressure Obama into approving tax cuts for the richest Americans says otherwise.
> 
> As does the "support BP" campaigns y'all mounted.
> 
> You think no one is taking notes?



 The biggest concern of Tea Partiers is:

1)  Out of control government spending. Although it's probably too late to avoid a financial crisis precipitated by enourmous government debt, Tea Partiers would like to try to avert it by insisting on the exercise of fiscal responsibilty. Primarily that entails massive spending cuts. If you want to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans too, that's fine with me. 

2)  The lack of responsiveness by government officials to the desires of the people. They want public officials to act within the boundaries of constutional authority, not by fiat. The arrogance of Reed, Pelosi, Obama infuriates Tea Partiers, because we don't believe that we need government to tell us what to do in order to keep our lives on track. Tea Partiers don't want government bureaucrats enacting rules that govern their every day affairs, we can fend for ourselves very nicely thank you very much. Government should perform the bare minimum of functions necessary for the common good and then get out of the way, because every time it tries to improve peoples lives by providing a service they should be doing for themselves, it screws things up at twice the cost.


----------



## Annie

debater said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
Click to expand...

The majority were NOT tea partiers, I know that's hard for some to follow.


----------



## Annie

Madeline said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Some Tea Party supporters seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the interests of the mega-wealthy (pass the tax cuts for the rich or else) and those of the middle class, Annie.  They seem to believe the economic downturn was not caused by Wall Street and the banks, but by heavy government regulation and taxation.  That to reverse this downturn, we need only remove this impediment.
> 
> They seem to forget, the LACK of government regulation allowed BP to install a defective well in the Gulf, allowed Bernie Madoff to steal billions, allowed Big Ag to sell bad food, etc.  They also seem not to notice how jobs are hemorraging out of this country, or that importing cheap Chinese goods may not be best for us all.
> 
> Some people seem to get an emotional high out of perceiving themselves as aligned with the mega-wealthy.....and will fight for their interests even at the cost of their own, to sate this craving.
> 
> JMO, of course.
Click to expand...


Again, you seem to avoid identifying just which officials you are referring to. All Republicans are not tea partiers in their thinking, nor voting obviously.


----------



## dilloduck

Madeline said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Some Tea Party supporters seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the interests of the mega-wealthy (pass the tax cuts for the rich or else) and those of the middle class, Annie.  They seem to believe the economic downturn was not caused by Wall Street and the banks, but by heavy government regulation and taxation.  That to reverse this downturn, we need only remove this impediment.
> 
> They seem to forget, the LACK of government regulation allowed BP to install a defective well in the Gulf, allowed Bernie Madoff to steal billions, allowed Big Ag to sell bad food, etc.  They also seem not to notice how jobs are hemorraging out of this country, or that importing cheap Chinese goods may not be best for us all.
> 
> Some people seem to get an emotional high out of perceiving themselves as aligned with the mega-wealthy.....and will fight for their interests even at the cost of their own, to sate this craving.
> 
> JMO, of course.
Click to expand...


It's wise to respect entrepreneurs. We are dependent on them. Killing the golden goose helps no one.
We need balance. We need centrists.
Having the opposite ends of the spectrum take turns isn't working out real well and is polarizing the people.
When people are polarized their power is negated thereby ceding all real power to those who already have it.
Our rep system is a fine example.


----------



## code1211

debater said:


> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
Click to expand...



Corporations are, by definition, owned by groups who are comprised of those who have invested in the corporation and own the "stock" of the corporation.  The Board and the Chairmen of the board are elected by the stock holders.  A corporation is, therefore, quite literally a democratic organization of people who are pooling their resources for a common effort and common good.

What does "a liberal manner" mean?

Without corporations, how do you porpose that a middle class first rose then maintained?  Prior to the rise of corporations, there was no middle class.


----------



## code1211

Madeline said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Some Tea Party supporters seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the interests of the mega-wealthy (pass the tax cuts for the rich or else) and those of the middle class, Annie.  They seem to believe the economic downturn was not caused by Wall Street and the banks, but by heavy government regulation and taxation.  That to reverse this downturn, we need only remove this impediment.
> 
> They seem to forget, the LACK of government regulation allowed BP to install a defective well in the Gulf, allowed Bernie Madoff to steal billions, allowed Big Ag to sell bad food, etc.  They also seem not to notice how jobs are hemorraging out of this country, or that importing cheap Chinese goods may not be best for us all.
> Some people seem to get an emotional high out of perceiving themselves as aligned with the mega-wealthy.....and will fight for their interests even at the cost of their own, to sate this craving.
> 
> JMO, of course.
Click to expand...



I would submit that all of these were not the lack of regulation, but the lack of enforcement.


----------



## GStarz

debater said:


> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
Click to expand...


man, your post is so full of it it's amazing

1. Plenty of mega-corporations are run by liberals, cut the crap. That's stupid. Truly. CNN, Dreamworks, Oprah's mega-corp Harpo, billionaire George Soros, MCA/NBC/Universal, those alone are active propagandists and own most of the media, and also own sub-cops that pollute like mad.

2. 99% of corporations in America - at least that many - are small operations that hire less than 40 people - mom and pop stores, small farms, machine shops and the like. Many of those are just a few people, florists, stationary stores, etc. All need to form a corporation to protect themselves against liability. When you go after corporations, you're going after America itself. I know attacking corporations and misrepresenting them as mega, right-wing stereotypes is one of the last weapons of propaganda for the left, but it's still bullshit. We patriots don't like that. Go invade some other country.


----------



## WillowTree

debater said:


> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
Click to expand...


What would liberals replace corporations with?


----------



## code1211

Madeline said:


> Says you.  The massive support you guys gave to pressure Obama into approving tax cuts for the richest Americans says otherwise.
> 
> As does the "support BP" campaigns y'all mounted.
> 
> You think no one is taking notes?




Why is the continuation of the tax cuts for all who recieved them percieved by you as tax cuts for only the rich?

Are you of the school of thought that deems it appropriate that some be given freedoms that are withheld from others?  That some are to be punished for no other reason than to reward others?  Why is it that some are gripped by the need to create equality of outcome in place of equality of opportunity?  

Success does not constitute the grounds for repriasal any more than failure constitutes the grounds for victory.

Do you count among the "support BP crowd" the judges that ruled that the Obama policies were illegal?  The same courts that currently hold the administration in contempt?  At some point, the rule of law needs to be asserted in the conduct of government.

Equality before the law needs to be the lynch pin of the country.  If it is not, we are inviting the same insurrection that is gripping the Middle East today.


----------



## code1211

Annie said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The majority were NOT tea partiers, I know that's hard for some to follow.
Click to expand...



However, the number that are TEA Party supporters outnumber the membership of the Congressional Black Caucus.  This is not an unsubstantial group in either number or passion.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The Tea Party congressional caucus has a chance to be a real player, but it must not protect the rich at the expense of all other Americans. If it supports populist causes, then it may become a longtime force in politics.


----------



## Annie

code1211 said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
> 
> 
> 
> The majority were NOT tea partiers, I know that's hard for some to follow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> However, the number that are TEA Party supporters outnumber the membership of the Congressional Black Caucus.  This is not an unsubstantial group in either number or passion.
Click to expand...


Which has zero to do with anything above.


----------



## uscitizen

debater said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
Click to expand...


More specifically those who joined the Tea Party Caucus I would think.


----------



## Annie

uscitizen said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More specifically those who joined the Tea Party Caucus I would think.
Click to expand...


Have they been voting as a bloc? Not on the Patriot Act I know. In the Senate, last I saw there were 3 members. 

right now the most portent force of the tea parties is as influencers. People are coming around to the premises that are the basics. It's not Democrat and Republican, the elitists in both are going to dislike those that agree with the ideas.


----------



## debater

Annie said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The majority of those who swept into the House in the mid-term election of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The majority were NOT tea partiers, I know that's hard for some to follow.
Click to expand...


They may not have been members of the Tea Party officially, but they follow the agenda of the Tea Party.


----------



## debater

code1211 said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Corporations are, by definition, owned by groups who are comprised of those who have invested in the corporation and own the "stock" of the corporation.  The Board and the Chairmen of the board are elected by the stock holders.  A corporation is, therefore, quite literally a democratic organization of people who are pooling their resources for a common effort and common good.
> 
> What does "a liberal manner" mean?
> 
> Without corporations, how do you porpose that a middle class first rose then maintained?  Prior to the rise of corporations, there was no middle class.
Click to expand...


That's not the point. There's nothing wrong with corporations per se, just the way many of them are run and the fact that they are allowed to dominate our political system.


----------



## debater

GStarz said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> man, your post is so full of it it's amazing
> 
> 1. Plenty of mega-corporations are run by liberals, cut the crap. That's stupid. Truly. CNN, Dreamworks, Oprah's mega-corp Harpo, billionaire George Soros, MCA/NBC/Universal, those alone are active propagandists and own most of the media, and also own sub-cops that pollute like mad.
> 
> 2. 99% of corporations in America - at least that many - are small operations that hire less than 40 people - mom and pop stores, small farms, machine shops and the like. Many of those are just a few people, florists, stationary stores, etc. All need to form a corporation to protect themselves against liability. When you go after corporations, you're going after America itself. I know attacking corporations and misrepresenting them as mega, right-wing stereotypes is one of the last weapons of propaganda for the left, but it's still bullshit. We patriots don't like that. Go invade some other country.
Click to expand...


Obviously you are ignorant. Only an ignorant person would think that corporations are run in a liberal manner. It doesn't matter what the personal beliefs of the CEO's are. Corporations are run to maximize profit and are conservative in their nature. This is what allows them to dominate our economy.In addition, it's foolish to assume that when talking about how corporations have a stranglehold on our government, that we are talking about local florists.


----------



## AllieBaba

Madeline said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know more which candidates you are referring to. So broad a bush, so light on specifics.
> 
> Madeline, you agreed so please, feel free to add to the specifics of what you were agreeing with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Some Tea Party supporters seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the interests of the mega-wealthy (pass the tax cuts for the rich or else) and those of the middle class, Annie. They seem to believe the economic downturn was not caused by Wall Street and the banks, but by heavy government regulation and taxation. That to reverse this downturn, we need only remove this impediment.
> 
> They seem to forget, the LACK of government regulation allowed BP to install a defective well in the Gulf, allowed Bernie Madoff to steal billions, allowed Big Ag to sell bad food, etc. They also seem not to notice how jobs are hemorraging out of this country, or that importing cheap Chinese goods may not be best for us all.
> 
> Some people seem to get an emotional high out of perceiving themselves as aligned with the mega-wealthy.....and will fight for their interests even at the cost of their own, to sate this craving.
> 
> JMO, of course.
Click to expand...

 
Nice try, Madeline, but the faulty well in the Gulf has exfuckinglutely nothing to do with anything you're talking about. In other words, you're rambling incoherently and just dragging some very fuzzy facts to support your marginal logic.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Madeline said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all fairness, it isn't easy to tell who is and is not in the Tea Party, and I suspect there's a wide divergence among those who view themselves as belonging as to what this movement is about.
> 
> But yes, many clearly do support such candidates.  I think many people are fearful about the state of the economy and desperately want things to improve.  They have come to believe that our pain is caused because government impedes business, and that if business were less regulated, had to pay lower taxes, and were better received by government, the economy would boom.....and there's some truth in this.
> 
> The problem is, the economy that would result would have fewer jobs for middle class, educated people, as they'd ship more off-shore.  There'd be less made here, as labor is cheaper elsewhere and workplace safety laws are less stringent elsewhere.   It can be almost impossible to convince a person making $40k a year that his interests and those of the Billionaries are not the same.
Click to expand...


I imagine that corporatists are trying to co-opt the Tea Party movement as it did the social cons and neo-cons to form an alliance that had the votes.  We see where all of that went.

I will support any Tea Party candidate who is for reduced spending, recognition of workers rights to bargain collectively, and populist causes.


----------



## debater

If you can't follow Madeline's logic, you are hopelessly lost. Well stated Madeline!


----------



## debater

JakeStarkey said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all fairness, it isn't easy to tell who is and is not in the Tea Party, and I suspect there's a wide divergence among those who view themselves as belonging as to what this movement is about.
> 
> But yes, many clearly do support such candidates.  I think many people are fearful about the state of the economy and desperately want things to improve.  They have come to believe that our pain is caused because government impedes business, and that if business were less regulated, had to pay lower taxes, and were better received by government, the economy would boom.....and there's some truth in this.
> 
> The problem is, the economy that would result would have fewer jobs for middle class, educated people, as they'd ship more off-shore.  There'd be less made here, as labor is cheaper elsewhere and workplace safety laws are less stringent elsewhere.   It can be almost impossible to convince a person making $40k a year that his interests and those of the Billionaries are not the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I imagine that corporatists are trying to co-opt the Tea Party movement as it did the social cons and neo-cons to form an alliance that had the votes.  We see where all of that went.
> 
> I will support any Tea Party candidate who is for reduced spending, recognition of workers rights to bargain collectively, and populist causes.
Click to expand...


It's the Tea Party members who need to be more aware of how they are being manipulated. You don't have to be in the Tea Party to support the things you listed.


----------



## code1211

Annie said:


> code1211 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> The majority were NOT tea partiers, I know that's hard for some to follow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, the number that are TEA Party supporters outnumber the membership of the Congressional Black Caucus.  This is not an unsubstantial group in either number or passion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which has zero to do with anything above.
Click to expand...



I was only speaking to the potential for impact by the group of about 40 TEA Party folks.  Any group that large whether it's the CBC, the TP or the Stupak amendment folks can have real power in votes if they stick together.

The TEA Party folks appear to have the willingness to stick together.


----------



## JakeStarkey

debater said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> In all fairness, it isn't easy to tell who is and is not in the Tea Party, and I suspect there's a wide divergence among those who view themselves as belonging as to what this movement is about.
> 
> But yes, many clearly do support such candidates.  I think many people are fearful about the state of the economy and desperately want things to improve.  They have come to believe that our pain is caused because government impedes business, and that if business were less regulated, had to pay lower taxes, and were better received by government, the economy would boom.....and there's some truth in this.
> 
> The problem is, the economy that would result would have fewer jobs for middle class, educated people, as they'd ship more off-shore.  There'd be less made here, as labor is cheaper elsewhere and workplace safety laws are less stringent elsewhere.   It can be almost impossible to convince a person making $40k a year that his interests and those of the Billionaries are not the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine that corporatists are trying to co-opt the Tea Party movement as it did the social cons and neo-cons to form an alliance that had the votes.  We see where all of that went.
> 
> I will support any Tea Party candidate who is for reduced spending, recognition of workers rights to bargain collectively, and populist causes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Tea Party members who need to be more aware of how they are being manipulated. You don't have to be in the Tea Party to support the things you listed.
Click to expand...



I wrote "Tea Party candidate", not Tea Party.  There are too many wacks and flakes trying to co-opt the entity to bad purposes.


----------



## The Infidel

debater said:


> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
Click to expand...



You need to change your username to "talking point"

Its more fitting a name for ya


----------



## code1211

JakeStarkey said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Tea Party people support candidates that do the bidding of corporations and who support Wall Street?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all fairness, it isn't easy to tell who is and is not in the Tea Party, and I suspect there's a wide divergence among those who view themselves as belonging as to what this movement is about.
> 
> But yes, many clearly do support such candidates.  I think many people are fearful about the state of the economy and desperately want things to improve.  They have come to believe that our pain is caused because government impedes business, and that if business were less regulated, had to pay lower taxes, and were better received by government, the economy would boom.....and there's some truth in this.
> 
> The problem is, the economy that would result would have fewer jobs for middle class, educated people, as they'd ship more off-shore.  There'd be less made here, as labor is cheaper elsewhere and workplace safety laws are less stringent elsewhere.   It can be almost impossible to convince a person making $40k a year that his interests and those of the Billionaries are not the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I imagine that corporatists are trying to co-opt the Tea Party movement as it did the social cons and neo-cons to form an alliance that had the votes.  We see where all of that went.
> 
> I will support any Tea Party candidate who is for reduced spending, recognition of workers rights to bargain collectively, and populist causes.
Click to expand...




There are two separate and distinct groups that bargain collectively:

Private sector and public sector.

If a TEA Party Candidate or office holder is against higher taxes, he is logically against the excessively high benefits and wages granted to many in the public sector.  When the Public Sector employees have cradle to grave benefits and wages twice that of their private sector bretheran, supporting their "right" to bargain collectively is opposing the "right" of everyone else to enjoy lower taxes.

When Democrat office holders grant huge benefit increases and then accept huge campaign donations from unions with which they "bargained", this is at least suspect and very probably incestuously dishonest.  

One needn't use much imagination to connect the dots between this practice and outright bribery.


----------



## JakeStarkey

All of that may be true.  However, when the union leadership is saying wages, benefits, everything except collective bargaining rights is on the table, then Governor Mubarek Walker's utterances about not being a union buster is suspect.


----------



## debater

The Infidel said:


> debater said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GStarz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The premise of your question assumes that there is something intrinsically wrong with corporations. They provide almost all the jobs In America and many are owned by billionaire ultra hard-core liberals like George Soros and Ted Turner, and their operations screw people all the time and pollute like mad. So what's your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Corporations provide many jobs of course, but that's because they have grown so powerful. The way that most corporations operate is to the detriment of a democratic society, as they manipulate politics and trample over the rights of citizens. Most corporations are not run by liberals and certainly do not function in a liberal manner.
> 
> So why do people in the Tea Party, who are angry about the Wall Street bailout, support members of Congress who allow corporations to exercise so much power? These people are fighting against the governments ability to control the power of the corporations that are doing so much damage to the middle class.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You need to change your username to "talking point"
> 
> Its more fitting a name for ya
Click to expand...


You can't identify what talking points are, since your comment is nonsensical. The monster trucks are proof enough.


----------



## debater

code1211 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> In all fairness, it isn't easy to tell who is and is not in the Tea Party, and I suspect there's a wide divergence among those who view themselves as belonging as to what this movement is about.
> 
> But yes, many clearly do support such candidates.  I think many people are fearful about the state of the economy and desperately want things to improve.  They have come to believe that our pain is caused because government impedes business, and that if business were less regulated, had to pay lower taxes, and were better received by government, the economy would boom.....and there's some truth in this.
> 
> The problem is, the economy that would result would have fewer jobs for middle class, educated people, as they'd ship more off-shore.  There'd be less made here, as labor is cheaper elsewhere and workplace safety laws are less stringent elsewhere.   It can be almost impossible to convince a person making $40k a year that his interests and those of the Billionaries are not the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine that corporatists are trying to co-opt the Tea Party movement as it did the social cons and neo-cons to form an alliance that had the votes.  We see where all of that went.
> 
> I will support any Tea Party candidate who is for reduced spending, recognition of workers rights to bargain collectively, and populist causes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are two separate and distinct groups that bargain collectively:
> 
> Private sector and public sector.
> 
> If a TEA Party Candidate or office holder is against higher taxes, he is logically against the excessively high benefits and wages granted to many in the public sector.  When the Public Sector employees have cradle to grave benefits and wages twice that of their private sector bretheran, supporting their "right" to bargain collectively is opposing the "right" of everyone else to enjoy lower taxes.
> 
> When Democrat office holders grant huge benefit increases and then accept huge campaign donations from unions with which they "bargained", this is at least suspect and very probably incestuously dishonest.
> 
> One needn't use much imagination to connect the dots between this practice and outright bribery.
Click to expand...


Nice fantasy, but in fact private sector jobs on average have far higher wages than the public sector. Where are you getting your information? And unlike many private sector jobs, public service contributes to the community.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Walker admits to 'Koch' that union-busting is ultimate goal

Governor Walker admit he wants to bust unions.  It's time for Wisconsin citizens to bust him and any legislator who supports him.


----------



## wihosa

Thanks to Gov. Walkers willingness to run his mouth about his and the GOP's real agenda for American workers, to what he thought was his corporate overlord, David Koch, we now know that the the fiscal crises he created with his massive tax give away to the wealthy was just a pretext for Union Busting.

This has always been the agenda of the wealthy and the corporations, bust the unions!

If you're one of the suckers who have been fooled into hating unions think about what was created by unions for a minute and you might change your minds. 

Before unions, most employees worked 10 hrs. a day, six days a week. There was no such thing as a "week end". There was no such thing as "overtime pay". No sick pay, no workers compensation, no unemployment insurance, no Social Security (fully half of seniors lived below the poverty line), no medicare, no child labor laws.

Essentially, every thing we think of as standard employment practices were created by unions. People literally died for these gains and now the wealthy want to do away with all of it, then we'll be just like Mexico, the uber rich living behind guarded gates and the rest living at subsitance levels.

The vast majority of Americans have seen a reduction in their buying power (real wages) over the last three decades of the GOP agenda.

If the righties win this battle, which direction do you think wages will be heading in the future?


----------



## Avorysuds

LOL fucking dumb thread lol.


----------



## California Girl

4th fucking thread on this topic. Is nobody capable of using a simple 'search' function? 

It's no wonder we elect idiots.


----------



## Whitefeather

We do need our unions. I think Congess needs a leash.


----------



## wihosa

As expected, even though it apparently the fourth thread on this subject, the tounge tied righties have no coherent reply, just obfuscation.


----------



## California Girl

wihosa said:


> As expected, even though it apparently the fourth thread on this subject, the tounge tied righties have no coherent reply, just obfuscation.



That'll be because we're already said it, you moronic half wit. Why are we supposed to repeat ourselves just because you're too fucking stupid to use the 'search' function? 

You have my sympathy, terminal stupidity is painful - so I understand.


----------



## Missourian

Do you really believe we don't know what Walker actually said?  

It's right over there in the sidebar from MSNBC ---------------------------->

.
.
.
.At that point, Murphy posing as Koch says: &#8220;I tell you what Scott. Once you crush these bastards, I&#8217;ll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.&#8221;


*&#8220;Allright, that would be outstanding," Walker replies. "Thanks for all the support and help ... moving the ball forward and we appreciate it. &#8230; We&#8217;re doing the just and right thing for the right reasons. Its all about getting our freedom back."*


Murphy/Koch: &#8220;Absolutely, and you know, we have a little bit of vested interest as well&#8221; (he then laughs).


Walker: &#8220;That&#8217;s just it. *The bottom line is were going to get the world moving here because it&#8217;s the **right thing** to do*&#8230;Thanks a million.&#8221;

​That couldn't have gone more wrong for the leftist,  who's lines are in red.


Not even a good try.


Way to go!  You have revealed Republican's true objective...to do the right thing for the right reasons.


----------



## WillowTree

wihosa said:


> Thanks to Gov. Walkers willingness to run his mouth about his and the GOP's real agenda for American workers, to what he thought was his corporate overlord, David Koch, we now know that the the fiscal crises he created with his massive tax give away to the wealthy was just a pretext for Union Busting.
> 
> This has always been the agenda of the wealthy and the corporations, bust the unions!
> 
> If you're one of the suckers who have been fooled into hating unions think about what was created by unions for a minute and you might change your minds.
> 
> Before unions, most employees worked 10 hrs. a day, six days a week. There was no such thing as a "week end". There was no such thing as "overtime pay". No sick pay, no workers compensation, no unemployment insurance, no Social Security (fully half of seniors lived below the poverty line), no medicare, no child labor laws.
> 
> Essentially, every thing we think of as standard employment practices were created by unions. People literally died for these gains and now the wealthy want to do away with all of it, then we'll be just like Mexico, the uber rich living behind guarded gates and the rest living at subsitance levels.
> 
> The vast majority of Americans have seen a reduction in their buying power (real wages) over the last three decades of the GOP agenda.
> 
> If the righties win this battle, which direction do you think wages will be heading in the future?



We pay your fucking bills. Without corporations and taxpayers unions could not exist.. deal with  turdknocker.


----------



## Two Thumbs

wihosa said:


> Thanks to Gov. Walkers willingness to run his mouth about his and the GOP's real agenda for American workers, to what he thought was his corporate overlord, David Koch, Nothing was made clear except the we didn't stoop to putting trouble makers in the crowds like dems do.we now know that the the fiscal crises he created How did he create it already? with his massive tax give away to the wealthy was just a pretext for Union Busting.  What's in like in Fantasy World?
> 
> This has always been the agenda of the wealthy and the corporations, bust the unions! links that prove this?
> 
> If you're one of the suckers who have been fooled into hating unions think about what was created by unions for a minute and you might change your minds. No.  I've thought about this time and time again.  The unions have become a vile megacorp that cares for nothing other than it's own survival.
> 
> Before unions, most employees worked 10 hrs. a day, six days a week. There was no such thing as a "week end". There was no such thing as "overtime pay". No sick pay, no workers compensation, no unemployment insurance, no Social Security (fully half of seniors lived below the poverty line), no medicare, no child labor laws.  And they helped end that.  Now they will crush the economy to get paid birthdays off.
> 
> Essentially, every thing we think of as standard employment practices were created by unions. Not at all true People literally died for these gains and now the wealthy want to do away with all of it, lie then we'll be just like Mexico,lie the uber rich living behind guarded gates and the rest living at subsitance levels. lie
> 
> The vast majority of Americans have seen a reduction in their buying power (real wages) over the last three decades of the GOP agenda. The GOP has been running the show for 30 years?  lie
> 
> If the righties win this battle, which direction do you think wages will be heading in the future?



good lord

You and the idea of personal responsibility have never met.


----------



## ABikerSailor

WillowTree said:


> wihosa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks to Gov. Walkers willingness to run his mouth about his and the GOP's real agenda for American workers, to what he thought was his corporate overlord, David Koch, we now know that the the fiscal crises he created with his massive tax give away to the wealthy was just a pretext for Union Busting.
> 
> This has always been the agenda of the wealthy and the corporations, bust the unions!
> 
> If you're one of the suckers who have been fooled into hating unions think about what was created by unions for a minute and you might change your minds.
> 
> Before unions, most employees worked 10 hrs. a day, six days a week. There was no such thing as a "week end". There was no such thing as "overtime pay". No sick pay, no workers compensation, no unemployment insurance, no Social Security (fully half of seniors lived below the poverty line), no medicare, no child labor laws.
> 
> Essentially, every thing we think of as standard employment practices were created by unions. People literally died for these gains and now the wealthy want to do away with all of it, then we'll be just like Mexico, the uber rich living behind guarded gates and the rest living at subsitance levels.
> 
> The vast majority of Americans have seen a reduction in their buying power (real wages) over the last three decades of the GOP agenda.
> 
> If the righties win this battle, which direction do you think wages will be heading in the future?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We pay your fucking bills. Without corporations and taxpayers unions could not exist.. deal with  turdknocker.
Click to expand...


Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........

You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.

But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.


----------



## R.D.

ABikerSailor said:


> Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........
> 
> You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.
> 
> But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.




 Oh the terror....ankle length dresses, ice delveries and unicycles are on the horizon .


----------



## Two Thumbs

ABikerSailor said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wihosa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks to Gov. Walkers willingness to run his mouth about his and the GOP's real agenda for American workers, to what he thought was his corporate overlord, David Koch, we now know that the the fiscal crises he created with his massive tax give away to the wealthy was just a pretext for Union Busting.
> 
> This has always been the agenda of the wealthy and the corporations, bust the unions!
> 
> If you're one of the suckers who have been fooled into hating unions think about what was created by unions for a minute and you might change your minds.
> 
> Before unions, most employees worked 10 hrs. a day, six days a week. There was no such thing as a "week end". There was no such thing as "overtime pay". No sick pay, no workers compensation, no unemployment insurance, no Social Security (fully half of seniors lived below the poverty line), no medicare, no child labor laws.
> 
> Essentially, every thing we think of as standard employment practices were created by unions. People literally died for these gains and now the wealthy want to do away with all of it, then we'll be just like Mexico, the uber rich living behind guarded gates and the rest living at subsitance levels.
> 
> The vast majority of Americans have seen a reduction in their buying power (real wages) over the last three decades of the GOP agenda.
> 
> If the righties win this battle, which direction do you think wages will be heading in the future?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We pay your fucking bills. Without corporations and taxpayers unions could not exist.. deal with  turdknocker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........
> 
> You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.
> 
> But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.
Click to expand...


And global warming will create desertification of the world in 10 years (said 11 years ago)
The sky is falling.
cats and dogs living together
all the labor laws will be tossed out when no one is looking
I, you, we, will all still get to bargin for pay, time off, etc.  we will just have to do it ourselves, the horror of it all


----------



## MaggieMae

Missourian said:


> Do you really believe we don't know what Walker actually said?
> 
> It's right over there in the sidebar from MSNBC ---------------------------->
> 
> .
> .
> .
> .At that point, Murphy posing as Koch says: I tell you what Scott. Once you crush these bastards, Ill fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.
> 
> 
> *Allright, that would be outstanding," Walker replies. "Thanks for all the support and help ... moving the ball forward and we appreciate it.  Were doing the just and right thing for the right reasons. Its all about getting our freedom back."*
> 
> 
> Murphy/Koch: Absolutely, and you know, we have a little bit of vested interest as well (he then laughs).
> 
> 
> Walker: Thats just it. *The bottom line is were going to get the world moving here because its the **right thing** to do*Thanks a million.
> 
> ​That couldn't have gone more wrong for the leftist,  who's lines are in red.
> 
> 
> Not even a good try.
> 
> 
> Way to go!  You have revealed Republican's true objective...to do the right thing for the right reasons.



I don't see the transcript on MSNBC. In fact, I can't find a transcript anywhere. I was looking for the word he used to describe Mika Brzezinski since it's bleeped on the videos. I'm guessing "some piece of *ass*." Nice. What was Mrs. Walker's reaction, I wonder.


----------



## MaggieMae

California Girl said:


> wihosa said:
> 
> 
> 
> As expected, even though it apparently the fourth thread on this subject, the tounge tied righties have no coherent reply, just obfuscation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That'll be because we're already said it, you moronic half wit. Why are we supposed to repeat ourselves just because you're too fucking stupid to use the 'search' function?
> 
> You have my sympathy, terminal stupidity is painful - so I understand.
Click to expand...


A quick search in Active Topics, and I didn't see any others. Lots of stuff like this gets merged eventually anyway. Just because Governor Walker blew his image of the second coming of Ronald Reagan doesn't mean you need to get all huffy. Someone else more pure will come along, trust me. 

I do wonder, though, when these politicians are going to *GET IT* that everything transmitted these days can be retrieved and used against them.


----------



## Claudette

In the WI they have had public worker protection on the books since 1905. I'm sure many other States have those same protections.

I doubt they will move backward in the treatment of their public workers just because the Union has lost power. 

Hell. The workers may decide that they don't need the Union at all. 

Wouldn't that be something??


----------



## ABikerSailor

MaggieMae said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really believe we don't know what Walker actually said?
> 
> It's right over there in the sidebar from MSNBC ---------------------------->
> 
> .
> .
> .
> .At that point, Murphy posing as Koch says: I tell you what Scott. Once you crush these bastards, Ill fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.
> 
> 
> *Allright, that would be outstanding," Walker replies. "Thanks for all the support and help ... moving the ball forward and we appreciate it.  Were doing the just and right thing for the right reasons. Its all about getting our freedom back."*
> 
> 
> Murphy/Koch: Absolutely, and you know, we have a little bit of vested interest as well (he then laughs).
> 
> 
> Walker: Thats just it. *The bottom line is were going to get the world moving here because its the **right thing** to do*Thanks a million.
> 
> ​That couldn't have gone more wrong for the leftist,  who's lines are in red.
> 
> 
> Not even a good try.
> 
> 
> Way to go!  You have revealed Republican's true objective...to do the right thing for the right reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see the transcript on MSNBC. In fact, I can't find a transcript anywhere. I was looking for the word he used to describe Mika Brzezinski since it's bleeped on the videos. I'm guessing "some piece of *ass*." Nice. What was Mrs. Walker's reaction, I wonder.
Click to expand...


Here ya go Maggie......just because I like ya......



> Walker: Yeah, hes all right. He was fair to me. I mean, the rest of them were out there. Although I had fun, they had (New York Sen. Chuck) Schumer over from New York on ripping me, and then they had a little clip of a state senator hiding out ripping me, and it was almost too easy. I walked in, Joe asked me a question and I said, well, before I answer that, let me just point out the amazing irony of the fact that youve got a United States senator from New York, a senator who by the way is part of a team that cant seem to balance the federal budget talking about my budget. At least hes coming into work to talk about something, although its mine. And youve got one of these 14 state Senate Democrats who cant even bother to show up and deal with the budget hes elected to do something about. And uh, so that kind of tells you the whole story right there.
> 
> *Murphy: Beautiful; beautiful. You gotta love that Mika Brzezinski (co-host of Morning Joe); shes a real piece of [expletive].*
> 
> Walker: Oh yeah. A couple weeks ago, Id known Joe before, but I was having dinner with Jim Sensenbrenner when I came into D.C. for a day to do an event and wed gone over to do the The Greta Show and had dinner with Congressman Sensenbrenner and right next to us was the two of them and their guest was [Obamas Senior Adviser David] Axelrod. I came over, I introduced myself.
> 
> Murphy: That son of a [expletive]!
> 
> Walker: Yeah no kidding huh? Introduced myself and said I figured you probably knew who I was since your boss was campaigning against me but its always good to let them know you know whats going on.



As far as the full transcript?  Here's a link for ya.......

Transcript of prank call to Walker - JSOnline


----------



## MaggieMae

ABikerSailor said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wihosa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks to Gov. Walkers willingness to run his mouth about his and the GOP's real agenda for American workers, to what he thought was his corporate overlord, David Koch, we now know that the the fiscal crises he created with his massive tax give away to the wealthy was just a pretext for Union Busting.
> 
> This has always been the agenda of the wealthy and the corporations, bust the unions!
> 
> If you're one of the suckers who have been fooled into hating unions think about what was created by unions for a minute and you might change your minds.
> 
> Before unions, most employees worked 10 hrs. a day, six days a week. There was no such thing as a "week end". There was no such thing as "overtime pay". No sick pay, no workers compensation, no unemployment insurance, no Social Security (fully half of seniors lived below the poverty line), no medicare, no child labor laws.
> 
> Essentially, every thing we think of as standard employment practices were created by unions. People literally died for these gains and now the wealthy want to do away with all of it, then we'll be just like Mexico, the uber rich living behind guarded gates and the rest living at subsitance levels.
> 
> The vast majority of Americans have seen a reduction in their buying power (real wages) over the last three decades of the GOP agenda.
> 
> If the righties win this battle, which direction do you think wages will be heading in the future?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We pay your fucking bills. Without corporations and taxpayers unions could not exist.. deal with  turdknocker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........
> 
> You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.
> 
> But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.
Click to expand...


While I don't for a moment believe working conditions will get that bad, I do see no more oversight on working conditions if management no longer has nothing to fear. Wages in general will start to decrease (they've already stayed level for over a decade), and thousands MORE who have become accustomed to X amount in their paychecks will see their salaries decrease to the point more foreclosures will occur, more people turning to the federal government for help from existing social umbrellas, and somebody will have to pay for all that. The big picture doesn't ever seem to be a consideration when Republicans start slicing and dicing. Repercussions can be a bitch.


----------



## MaggieMae

Claudette said:


> In the WI they have had public worker protection on the books since 1905. I'm sure many other States have those same protections.
> 
> I doubt they will move backward in the treatment of their public workers just because the Union has lost power.
> 
> Hell. The workers may decide that they don't need the Union at all.
> 
> Wouldn't that be something??



In a decent economy with low unemployment, yes. But right now an employer can pretty much have the pick of the crop and just say no to what just a few years ago would have been a decent salary.


----------



## Two Thumbs

Claudette said:


> In the WI they have had public worker protection on the books since 1905. I'm sure many other States have those same protections.
> 
> I doubt they will move backward in the treatment of their public workers just because the Union has lost power.
> 
> Hell. The workers may decide that they don't need the Union at all.
> 
> Wouldn't that be something??



You mean like the people that work hard get raises and the losers get fired?

OH NOSE!  We can't have that!!

Or people that need health insurance bargin with thier employer and the people that don't bargin for getting more pay instead?

DEAR GAWD!!  The Horror!

And * and* gasp* choke* People get promoted based on skills instead of seniority?

ohhhh, ima gunna be siiicciiee.  I need a week of paid just to recover.


----------



## ABikerSailor

MaggieMae said:


> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the WI they have had public worker protection on the books since 1905. I'm sure many other States have those same protections.
> 
> I doubt they will move backward in the treatment of their public workers just because the Union has lost power.
> 
> Hell. The workers may decide that they don't need the Union at all.
> 
> Wouldn't that be something??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In a decent economy with low unemployment, yes. But right now an employer can pretty much have the pick of the crop and just say no to what just a few years ago would have been a decent salary.
Click to expand...


Not only that Maggie, but you should also take into consideration that most of the GOP types want to get rid of the minimum wage.


----------



## Two Thumbs

MaggieMae said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> We pay your fucking bills. Without corporations and taxpayers unions could not exist.. deal with  turdknocker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........
> 
> You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.
> 
> But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> While I don't for a moment believe working conditions will get that bad, I do see no more oversight on working conditions if management no longer has nothing to fear. So the worker can't make a report on conditions? or see a lawyer if nothing is done?  Wages in general will start to decrease  not union wages.  And if they did, more people would be able to afford what they build as the cost will come down. (they've already stayed level for over a decade), and thousands MORE who have become accustomed to X amount in their paychecks will see their salaries decrease to the point more foreclosures will occur,now you are making crap upl more people turning to the federal government for help from existing social umbrellas, that happens now. and somebody will have to pay for all that. The big picture doesn't ever seem to be a consideration when Republicans start slicing and dicing. Repercussions can be a bitch.
Click to expand...


We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting.

Talk about being short sighted....


----------



## Two Thumbs

ABikerSailor said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the WI they have had public worker protection on the books since 1905. I'm sure many other States have those same protections.
> 
> I doubt they will move backward in the treatment of their public workers just because the Union has lost power.
> 
> Hell. The workers may decide that they don't need the Union at all.
> 
> Wouldn't that be something??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In a decent economy with low unemployment, yes. But right now an employer can pretty much have the pick of the crop and just say no to what just a few years ago would have been a decent salary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not only that Maggie, but you should also take into consideration that most of the GOP types want to get rid of the minimum wage.
Click to expand...


What's the minimum wage done for us?

I was on it.  When it got raised things were better for ~ 3 months, then it was back to normal.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Two Thumbs said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........
> 
> You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.
> 
> But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While I don't for a moment believe working conditions will get that bad, I do see no more oversight on working conditions if management no longer has nothing to fear. So the worker can't make a report on conditions? or see a lawyer if nothing is done?  Wages in general will start to decrease  not union wages.  And if they did, more people would be able to afford what they build as the cost will come down. (they've already stayed level for over a decade), and thousands MORE who have become accustomed to X amount in their paychecks will see their salaries decrease to the point more foreclosures will occur,now you are making crap upl more people turning to the federal government for help from existing social umbrellas, that happens now. and somebody will have to pay for all that. The big picture doesn't ever seem to be a consideration when Republicans start slicing and dicing. Repercussions can be a bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting.
> 
> Talk about being short sighted....
Click to expand...


No, short sighted is being in favor of extending the Bush Jr. tax cuts for the wealthy, especially when we've seen what it did to this  country for the past 10 years.

You know.......if you reduce your income, you have less to spend.  Keeping the tax cuts for the top 2 percent and making the lower 50 percent pay for it is worse than short sighted.

It's insane.


----------



## Missourian

MaggieMae said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really believe we don't know what Walker actually said?
> 
> It's right over there in the sidebar from MSNBC ---------------------------->
> 
> .
> .
> .
> .At that point, Murphy posing as Koch says: &#8220;I tell you what Scott. Once you crush these bastards, I&#8217;ll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.&#8221;
> 
> 
> *&#8220;Allright, that would be outstanding," Walker replies. "Thanks for all the support and help ... moving the ball forward and we appreciate it. &#8230; We&#8217;re doing the just and right thing for the right reasons. Its all about getting our freedom back."*
> 
> 
> Murphy/Koch: &#8220;Absolutely, and you know, we have a little bit of vested interest as well&#8221; (he then laughs).
> 
> 
> Walker: &#8220;That&#8217;s just it. *The bottom line is were going to get the world moving here because it&#8217;s the **right thing** to do*&#8230;Thanks a million.&#8221;
> 
> ​That couldn't have gone more wrong for the leftist,  who's lines are in red.
> 
> 
> Not even a good try.
> 
> 
> Way to go!  You have revealed Republican's true objective...to do the right thing for the right reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see the transcript on MSNBC. In fact, I can't find a transcript anywhere. I was looking for the word he used to describe Mika Brzezinski since it's bleeped on the videos. I'm guessing "some piece of *ass*." Nice. What was Mrs. Walker's reaction, I wonder.
Click to expand...


Murphy the liberal said that,  not Walker.

Murphy said she was "a real piece of  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




".


Read the transcript Biker posted,  Walker comes off well,  that's why the transcript isn't everywhere.  

The Liberals hope that folks will confuse who said what.


----------



## MaggieMae

Two Thumbs said:


> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the WI they have had public worker protection on the books since 1905. I'm sure many other States have those same protections.
> 
> I doubt they will move backward in the treatment of their public workers just because the Union has lost power.
> 
> Hell. The workers may decide that they don't need the Union at all.
> 
> Wouldn't that be something??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like the people that work hard get raises and the losers get fired?
> 
> OH NOSE!  We can't have that!!
> 
> Or people that need health insurance bargin with thier employer and the people that don't bargin for getting more pay instead?
> 
> DEAR GAWD!!  The Horror!
> 
> And * and* gasp* choke* People get promoted based on skills instead of seniority?
> 
> ohhhh, ima gunna be siiicciiee.  I need a week of paid just to recover.
Click to expand...


And the ignorance continues day in and day out. Union membership represents less than 7% of the entire workforce, leaving 93% who DO try to bargain for the best they can get. Again, you people sound like you don't have a clue, believing that every working individual has a thug at his side negotiating his job perks.


----------



## MaggieMae

Two Thumbs said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yo......Shallow Skeeve..........
> 
> You DO realize that unions were created in response to the robber barons and poor working conditions of the mid 1800's to early 1900's.
> 
> But.........sure.........get rid of the unions.  That is......if you're fond of child labor, no overtime, no vacations and only 1 day off per week with virtually zero safety regulations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While I don't for a moment believe working conditions will get that bad, I do see no more oversight on working conditions if management no longer has nothing to fear. So the worker can't make a report on conditions? or see a lawyer if nothing is done?  Wages in general will start to decrease  not union wages.  And if they did, more people would be able to afford what they build as the cost will come down. (they've already stayed level for over a decade), and thousands MORE who have become accustomed to X amount in their paychecks will see their salaries decrease to the point more foreclosures will occur,now you are making crap upl more people turning to the federal government for help from existing social umbrellas, that happens now. and somebody will have to pay for all that. The big picture doesn't ever seem to be a consideration when Republicans start slicing and dicing. Repercussions can be a bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting.
> 
> Talk about being short sighted....
Click to expand...


Now who's making crap up?  

Points: 

What part of *MORE* _people will be...turning to government umbrellas_ didn't you understand?

Who's talking about INCREASING union pay? When have your *taxes* gone up (or is it even threatened) because of union wages? Are you talking about overall spending or union busting? Union contracts for state employees are negotiated with state labor officials. If your state taxes are going up, then take your complaints to your state representatives who apparently don't always know _how_ to negotiate union contracts. (You'd think by now, everyone would. Unions ALWAYS will fatten up the opening bid, knowing it will come down to something livable eventually.)


----------



## MaggieMae

ABikerSailor said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> While I don't for a moment believe working conditions will get that bad, I do see no more oversight on working conditions if management no longer has nothing to fear. So the worker can't make a report on conditions? or see a lawyer if nothing is done?  Wages in general will start to decrease  not union wages.  And if they did, more people would be able to afford what they build as the cost will come down. (they've already stayed level for over a decade), and thousands MORE who have become accustomed to X amount in their paychecks will see their salaries decrease to the point more foreclosures will occur,now you are making crap upl more people turning to the federal government for help from existing social umbrellas, that happens now. and somebody will have to pay for all that. The big picture doesn't ever seem to be a consideration when Republicans start slicing and dicing. Repercussions can be a bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting.
> 
> Talk about being short sighted....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, short sighted is being in favor of extending the Bush Jr. tax cuts for the wealthy, especially when we've seen what it did to this  country for the past 10 years.
> 
> You know.......if you reduce your income, you have less to spend.  Keeping the tax cuts for the top 2 percent and making the lower 50 percent pay for it is worse than short sighted.
> 
> It's insane.
Click to expand...


The tax deal at the midnight hour was the ONLY way to guarantee that the lesser classes got to keep their tax reductions too because the cuts for everyone were set to expire on December 31st. The Republicans would have filibustered right up until the end. Think of it as cutting off some fingers to save the rest of the hand. Plus, Obama got some sweet asides along with it, so it wasn't all bad.


----------



## signelect

The guy that started this is mentally deficient.  At one time union did serve a purpose but know the purpose is still us against them.  Don't they get it.  Name one company that the unions have started and one job that they have created.  Ever had the windows shot out of your house, my family has and they said that we couldn't prove it was the union but by some silly coincident it did happen during the union campaign, which they lost by the way.  Fair treatment of workers is an absolute must and if you find a company that is not doing it, look for a job somewhere else.


----------



## MaggieMae

Missourian said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really believe we don't know what Walker actually said?
> 
> It's right over there in the sidebar from MSNBC ---------------------------->
> 
> .
> .
> .
> .At that point, Murphy posing as Koch says: I tell you what Scott. Once you crush these bastards, Ill fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.
> 
> 
> *Allright, that would be outstanding," Walker replies. "Thanks for all the support and help ... moving the ball forward and we appreciate it.  Were doing the just and right thing for the right reasons. Its all about getting our freedom back."*
> 
> 
> Murphy/Koch: Absolutely, and you know, we have a little bit of vested interest as well (he then laughs).
> 
> 
> Walker: Thats just it. *The bottom line is were going to get the world moving here because its the **right thing** to do*Thanks a million.
> 
> ​That couldn't have gone more wrong for the leftist,  who's lines are in red.
> 
> 
> Not even a good try.
> 
> 
> Way to go!  You have revealed Republican's true objective...to do the right thing for the right reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see the transcript on MSNBC. In fact, I can't find a transcript anywhere. I was looking for the word he used to describe Mika Brzezinski since it's bleeped on the videos. I'm guessing "some piece of *ass*." Nice. What was Mrs. Walker's reaction, I wonder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Murphy the liberal said that,  not Walker.
> 
> Murphy said she was "a real piece of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ".
> 
> 
> Read the transcript Biker posted,  Walker comes off well,  that's why the transcript isn't everywhere.
> 
> The Liberals hope that folks will confuse who said what.
Click to expand...


I haven't had time to read it yet. Stay tuned.


----------



## Two Thumbs

ABikerSailor said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> While I don't for a moment believe working conditions will get that bad, I do see no more oversight on working conditions if management no longer has nothing to fear. So the worker can't make a report on conditions? or see a lawyer if nothing is done?  Wages in general will start to decrease  not union wages.  And if they did, more people would be able to afford what they build as the cost will come down. (they've already stayed level for over a decade), and thousands MORE who have become accustomed to X amount in their paychecks will see their salaries decrease to the point more foreclosures will occur,now you are making crap upl more people turning to the federal government for help from existing social umbrellas, that happens now. and somebody will have to pay for all that. The big picture doesn't ever seem to be a consideration when Republicans start slicing and dicing. Repercussions can be a bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting.
> 
> Talk about being short sighted....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, short sighted is being in favor of extending the Bush Jr. tax cuts for the wealthy, especially when we've seen what it did to this  country for the past 10 years.
> 
> You know.......if you reduce your income, you have less to spend.  Keeping the tax cuts for the top 2 percent and making the lower 50 percent pay for it is worse than short sighted.
> 
> It's insane.
Click to expand...


That's dimwitted at best.

The government doesn't need more money to spend, they need to spend less.  by taking more, WE all have less and the government just wastes it.


----------



## rightwinger

California Girl said:


> 4th fucking thread on this topic. Is nobody capable of using a simple 'search' function?
> 
> It's no wonder we elect idiots.



Actually, this is about the twentieth thread on this topic

But who the hell is counting and who the hell cares?


----------



## Momanohedhunter

bucs90 said:


> It is always fun to watch lefties make threads about how dumb Tea Party members are, and that thread being full of spelling and grammatical errors.



How about Rachel Madow and her Butt Vodka segment ?That is one smart woman right there.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Two Thumbs said:


> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting...



Let's stuff that crap back up Two Thumbs crap hole.

The three states with lowest deficits have teachers' unions.

The four states with the highest deficits have non teacher unions.

Anybody can look this up.


----------



## DiveCon

JakeStarkey said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's stuff that crap back up Two Thumbs crap hole.
> 
> The three states with lowest deficits have teachers' unions.
> 
> The four states with the highest deficits have non teacher unions.
> 
> Anybody can look this up.
Click to expand...

then you should have some links to back that up
yet you didnt post any


----------



## California Girl

MaggieMae said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wihosa said:
> 
> 
> 
> As expected, even though it apparently the fourth thread on this subject, the tounge tied righties have no coherent reply, just obfuscation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That'll be because we're already said it, you moronic half wit. Why are we supposed to repeat ourselves just because you're too fucking stupid to use the 'search' function?
> 
> You have my sympathy, terminal stupidity is painful - so I understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A quick search in Active Topics, and I didn't see any others. Lots of stuff like this gets merged eventually anyway. Just because Governor Walker blew his image of the second coming of Ronald Reagan doesn't mean you need to get all huffy. Someone else more pure will come along, trust me.
> 
> I do wonder, though, when these politicians are going to *GET IT* that everything transmitted these days can be retrieved and used against them.
Click to expand...


'Search' not 'active topics'..... there is a 'search' button. If one uses that, one will find out whether the subject is already being discussed. Not rocket science, and not 'huffy'. I just don't understand why people cannot use a simple function to ensure they don't start a thread that's already going.... particularly when they then fantasize that 'the right' don't respond because we're scared.... bored, maybe.... scared.... not during this lifetime.


----------



## Dr.House

DiveCon said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are being dragged into a deeper and deeper hole.  Increasing spending is beyond dumb.  Increasing union pay at the expence of the strapped tax payer is cruel, and will force them, but not the unions, to turn to the Fed for more money, which will increase the debt, lowering the value of the dollar, forcing more people to turn to the Fed, while unions demand more pay.  Keep doing what we are doing and we will keep getting what we are getting...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's stuff that crap back up Two Thumbs crap hole.
> 
> The three states with lowest deficits have teachers' unions.
> 
> The four states with the highest deficits have non teacher unions.
> 
> Anybody can look this up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> then you should have some links to back that up
> yet you didnt post any
Click to expand...


Please...

It's Jokey...  He never backs his shit up...

He'll now claim a.) you are lying and b.) that he pwns you daily...


----------



## DiveCon

Dr.House said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's stuff that crap back up Two Thumbs crap hole.
> 
> The three states with lowest deficits have teachers' unions.
> 
> The four states with the highest deficits have non teacher unions.
> 
> Anybody can look this up.
> 
> 
> 
> then you should have some links to back that up
> yet you didnt post any
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please...
> 
> It's Jokey...  He never backs his shit up...
> 
> He'll now claim a.) you are lying and b.) that he pwns you daily...
Click to expand...

of course
then he will dance around like a retard and claim victory


----------



## Victor Lee

The problems is that the liberal media of course likes to focus on those idiots that happen to go to Tea Party rallies.  Some of them are probably plants from liberal groups intended to smear, others are probably just dumb at baseline.  I am sure there are some liberals that you don't like or think are stupid (I hope).  Why would the media want to portray the Tea Party for the group of intelligent, educated, and peaceful people that most are?  They don't want the country to know that.  So far they have done a pretty decent job with the smear campaign, I must admit.


----------



## JakeStarkey

VictorLee, I agree.  Both conservative and liberal media play up their pet issues.  Stupid people, some of them plants from the other side, I am sure, go to each side's rallies.  Many in the Tea Party are undoubtedly "intelligent, educated, and peaceful people" as are many of the right, the center, and the left. However, if we are being honest, the left is far less adept at smearing their opponents in these days than they were in the 1960s.  The far right today is much better at smearing than they were in the sixties, when they lost the culture war.  That's all this is: a new fight over their loss in the sixties.  They will lose again: numbers, age, and color are against them.


----------



## Synthaholic

uscitizen said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure Christine, Sarah and Michelle have bright futures. Just look how far "Slow Joe" Biden has come with *his* limited intelligence value.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> come on now you can do better than that they are just as bad as we are stuff.
Click to expand...

No he can't.


----------



## Wry Catcher

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



All of them.  They all want (and believe) simple solutions to complex problems will solve any problems facing America today.  Of course the simple solutions require someone else to sacrifice, not them.
If they were 5 years old we would smile and call them magical thinkers.


----------



## hipeter924

Stupid Democrats that don't find a place on TV:


Stupid Republicans who do:


*cough* Do I need to point out the media bias here?


----------



## midcan5

LOL   "Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness." Blaise Pascal

Too funny, if one looks for nuts, you don't have to go to San Fran, pick any city in the world. "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill


----------



## Mad Scientist

Wry Catcher said:


> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of them.  They all want (and believe) simple solutions to complex problems will solve any problems facing America today.  Of course the simple solutions require someone else to sacrifice, not them.
> If they were 5 years old we would smile and call them magical thinkers.
Click to expand...

Liberals like to point out how smart they are as opposed to everyone else. They also like to say that the current problems are "complex and difficult" but in fact they are quite simple to solve.

Problem: Government taxes and spends too much.
Solution: Government should tax and spend less.

How about *government* sacrificing for once?

But the Left opposes smaller government because that's where their power lies.


----------



## Immanuel

Mad Scientist said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine O&#8217;Donnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, What&#8217;s up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of them.  They all want (and believe) simple solutions to complex problems will solve any problems facing America today.  Of course the simple solutions require someone else to sacrifice, not them.
> If they were 5 years old we would smile and call them magical thinkers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liberals like to point out how smart they are as opposed to everyone else. They also like to say that the current problems are "complex and difficult" but in fact they are quite simple to solve.
> 
> Problem: Government taxes and spends too much.
> Solution: Government should tax and spend less.
> 
> How about *government* sacrificing for once?
> 
> But the Left opposes smaller government because that's where their power lies.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately, I don't think it is that simple.

The government needs to and should spend less, but where it gets complicated is when you start discussing who it is going to be that is going to take the cuts.  

I think there is room to cut on defense and foreign aid.  I have a problem when discussing cutting welfare or some other social programs.  If it were up to me, foreign aid would be gone until we had our own house in order. You may think defense is the one area we cannot cut and we should be cutting out all forms of welfare.  That is just two of us, now think about the ideas of 435 Representatives and then throw in 100 Senators and shit!  We'll never be able to solve this issue.

Immie


----------



## JakeStarkey

Mad Scientist said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of them.  They all want (and believe) simple solutions to complex problems will solve any problems facing America today.  Of course the simple solutions require someone else to sacrifice, not them.
> If they were 5 years old we would smile and call them magical thinkers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liberals like to point out how smart they are as opposed to everyone else. They also like to say that the current problems are "complex and difficult" but in fact they are quite simple to solve.
> 
> Problem: Government taxes and spends too much.
> Solution: Government should tax and spend less.
> 
> How about *government* sacrificing for once?
> 
> But the Left opposes smaller government because that's where their power lies.
Click to expand...


When government will reduce corporate welfare equitably with public sector salary and compensation reductions, I will vote for that.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Mad Scientist said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of them.  They all want (and believe) simple solutions to complex problems will solve any problems facing America today.  Of course the simple solutions require someone else to sacrifice, not them.
> If they were 5 years old we would smile and call them magical thinkers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liberals like to point out how smart they are as opposed to everyone else. They also like to say that the current problems are "complex and difficult" but in fact they are quite simple to solve.
> 
> Problem: Government taxes and spends too much.
> Solution: Government should tax and spend less.
> 
> How about *government* sacrificing for once?
> 
> But the Left opposes smaller government because that's where their power lies.
Click to expand...


How about getting rid of the Bush Jr. era tax cuts (which were only supposed to run for 10 years to see if it did anything good, but it didn't), and making the corporations and the top 2 percent pay their fair share?


----------



## Synthaholic

ABikerSailor said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of them.  They all want (and believe) simple solutions to complex problems will solve any problems facing America today.  Of course the simple solutions require someone else to sacrifice, not them.
> If they were 5 years old we would smile and call them magical thinkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals like to point out how smart they are as opposed to everyone else. They also like to say that the current problems are "complex and difficult" but in fact they are quite simple to solve.
> 
> Problem: Government taxes and spends too much.
> Solution: Government should tax and spend less.
> 
> How about *government* sacrificing for once?
> 
> But the Left opposes smaller government because that's where their power lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How about getting rid of the Bush Jr. era tax cuts (which were only supposed to run for 10 years to see if it did anything good, but it didn't), and making the corporations and the top 2 percent pay their fair share?
Click to expand...

That would be good for America, so the Republicans will never go for that.


----------



## ABikerSailor

By the way.......as far as the original question?

The teabagger has a structure kinda like the military.........the more proficient you become in your job (and for teabaggers, that's being batshit crazy), the higher up you rise in the organization.

Bottom rung is being a redneck idiot with a sign shouting you've been taxed enough already.

Next rung up is a teabagger leader of an area.

Next rung, you get to be a spokesperson for some GOP group (i.e. Michael Steele).

Top rung is when they give you your own television show (i.e. Glen Beck and Sarah Palin).


----------



## Charles_Main

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



Have you not figured out by now that the Liberal Press goes to Tea Party gatherings and seeks out the loons to put on TV?

Cmon man, wise up.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Charles, Sarah and Sharon and Joe Michelle and Christine all jumped in front of the cameras and could not handle their own.  Each and every one of them shot him/herself in the foot.  Fox does that every chance it can to politicians it does not like.

That's a good thing for the voters.  I gained so much respect for McCain when crazywoman said BHO was a Muslim, and JM immediately corrected her on TV.  That is what we need.  Guys and gals that stay within reality and honorable behavior.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



The total fail of your thread title's lack of the word or is kinda funny.

Why don't you tell me what's wrong with the #2 guy that the tea party is standing behind for president.


----------



## JakeStarkey

George Will: Weird wing of GOP hurts conservative cause  George Will: Weird wing of GOP hurts conservative cause

We can start with this.


----------



## rdean

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?



They pick people they can relate to.  People that are "like them".


----------



## Spoonman

Megatron said:


> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?


You have to admit they were effective. Shut those dems down quick and rebalanced congress.  Sweet.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Megatron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palin started the trend of unprepared inept wannabe politicians jumping in front of a TV camera only to make a total ass of themselves and destroying any chance they ever had of gaining any office with the power to make real change.  Then came the lovable and laughable Christine ODonnell, and now Michele Bachmann.   Tea Partiers, Whats up with that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The total fail of your thread title's lack of the word or is kinda funny.
> 
> Why don't you tell me what's wrong with the #2 guy that the tea party is standing behind for president.
Click to expand...


Megatron are you here?


----------

