# Tea Party Plummeting



## Synthaholic

New CNN poll, just out:










http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf


----------



## Oddball

*yawn*


----------



## Synthaholic

As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the teabaggers, the more they don't like them.


----------



## driveby

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf



Pelosi at 31% ?  Bullshit........


----------



## toxicmedia

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf


Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.

At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.


----------



## Full-Auto

toxicmedia said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
Click to expand...


Why dont you point out the breakdown of party affiliation of those polled before weighing in further.


----------



## theHawk

I guess Wisconsin Dems will win in those recall elections easily then.


Oh wait...


----------



## hellofromwarsaw

Only 50% are duped on Pelosi by 24/7/365 PPM (Pub Propaganda machine).


----------



## toxicmedia

driveby said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pelosi at 31% ?  Bullshit........
Click to expand...

Before January I might have agreed...but she's been out of the news lately, and the Democrat's opinons of her don't change much anyway.


----------



## 8537

Wow, the Tea Party is in trouble - it's unfavorable rating is starting to approach the ratings for the Republican party!


----------



## Full-Auto

8537 said:


> Wow, the Tea Party is in trouble - it's unfavorable rating is starting to approach the ratings for the Republican party!



Why is it they did not post party affiliation of those polled?


----------



## toxicmedia

theHawk said:


> I guess Wisconsin Dems will win in those recall elections easily then.
> 
> 
> Oh wait...


Winning 2 out of 6 shouldn't have even happened. If the GOP still possessed the juju they had last November, not even 1 of them would have been recalled. The problem for the GOP during the next 5 years...will be that any wins will be subject to the same economic shit storm Obama faced when he took office. Don't get me wrong!...I'm not blaming Bush for that!...but whoever is in charge during the next 5 or 6 years is going to get blamed for the conitnued sluggish economy.


----------



## Flopper

The American public, being a rather fickle bunch, seem to be turning their attention from government spending to the current economy.   Worrying about what kind of future they are leaving for their kids seems to be taking a back seat to worrying about their jobs, IRAs and how current and future spending cuts will effect them and their community.

The Tea Party is becoming a "one trick pony" in the eyes of the people.  IMHO, there is a lot more to America's problems than just cutting federal spending.


----------



## theHawk

toxicmedia said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess Wisconsin Dems will win in those recall elections easily then.
> 
> 
> Oh wait...
> 
> 
> 
> Winning 2 out of 6 shouldn't have even happened. If the GOP still possessed the juju they had last November, not even 1 of them would have been recalled. The problem for the GOP during the next 5 years...will be that any wins will be subject to the same economic shit storm Obama faced when he took office. Don't get me wrong!...I'm not blaming Bush for that!...but whoever is in charge during the next 5 or 6 years is going to get blamed for the conitnued sluggish economy.
Click to expand...


One that lost was mainly due to personal attacks and accusations that he cheated on his wife.  He still only lost by 700 votes.

3 Dems are up for recall this next week so they could very well win back the 2 they lost.

Pretty good for a "blue state".


----------



## toxicmedia

theHawk said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess Wisconsin Dems will win in those recall elections easily then.
> 
> 
> Oh wait...
> 
> 
> 
> Winning 2 out of 6 shouldn't have even happened. If the GOP still possessed the juju they had last November, not even 1 of them would have been recalled. The problem for the GOP during the next 5 years...will be that any wins will be subject to the same economic shit storm Obama faced when he took office. Don't get me wrong!...I'm not blaming Bush for that!...but whoever is in charge during the next 5 or 6 years is going to get blamed for the conitnued sluggish economy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One that lost was mainly due to personal attacks and accusations that he cheated on his wife.  He still only lost by 700 votes.
> 
> 3 Dems are up for recall this next week so they could very well win back the 2 they lost.
> 
> Pretty good for a "blue state".
Click to expand...

Wisconsin ain't so blue anymore. You're right...anything can happen here, and the Democrats have a lot of baggage.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?


----------



## driveby

Bass v 2.0 said:


> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?



They destroyed the entire economy and were the cause of the credit downgrade according to leftist kook sellouts like yourself......


----------



## Mustang

Bass v 2.0 said:


> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?


 
They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.


----------



## Meister

Full-Auto said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why dont you point out the breakdown of party affiliation of those polled before weighing in further.
Click to expand...


Why is toxicmedia mute on the breakdown of party affiliation with this poll?  Couldn't be weighted like so many are....nah, what was I thinking.


----------



## Meister

Mustang said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
Click to expand...


No they didn't, quit with the lies.  POLITICIANS managed to get the credit rating downgraded.


----------



## toxicmedia

Full-Auto said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why dont you point out the breakdown of party affiliation of those polled before weighing in further.
Click to expand...

They didn't give an overall party affiliation total. You'll not be breaking any new ground by alleging bias from CNN/Opinion Research....however....if you look at the imtemized question party affiliation totals, they look pretty much split like most elections in the last 20 years, about 50/50. I'm not seeing a good case for the kind of shady crap like Republimussen Reports always throws out. The questions aren't leading, and they questioned both likely and non voters.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

driveby said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They destroyed the entire economy and were the cause of the credit downgrade according to leftist kook sellouts like yourself......
Click to expand...


Another shucking and jiving post from Mr:


----------



## toxicmedia

Meister said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why dont you point out the breakdown of party affiliation of those polled before weighing in further.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is toxicmedia mute on the breakdown of party affiliation with this poll?  Couldn't be weighted like so many are....nah, what was I thinking.
Click to expand...

Because I was actualy reading all of the data. There are 13 pages of it.


----------



## Meister

Bass v 2.0 said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They destroyed the entire economy and were the cause of the credit downgrade according to leftist kook sellouts like yourself......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another shucking and jiving post from Mr:
Click to expand...


Moron post of the day.  Thanks Bass, you never seem to let us down.


----------



## realife

Why in the hell are people getting on the Tea party? A person would have to really be inorant of how Broken Washington DC is if they really beleive that a group of about 60 House members in only 6 months could do all the damge some say. To me, blaming the A tea party(which its not a political party people) If like Blaming the guy who called 911 because a building was on fire. DC is on Fire and theese Patriots are calling 911!I wonder what a poll of peole who actually work and pay Taxes would show! hummm


----------



## Bass v 2.0

Meister said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> They destroyed the entire economy and were the cause of the credit downgrade according to leftist kook sellouts like yourself......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another shucking and jiving post from Mr:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Moron post of the day.  Thanks Bass, you never seem to let us down.
Click to expand...


Dumb Negro gave dumb house Negro response and got what he deserved.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

realife said:


> Why in the hell are people getting on the Tea party? A person would have to really be inorant of how Broken Washington DC is if they really beleive that a group of about 60 House members in only 6 months could do all the damge some say. To me, blaming the A tea party(which its not a political party people) If like Blaming the guy who called 911 because a building was on fire. DC is on Fire and theese Patriots are calling 911!I wonder what a poll of peole who actually work and pay Taxes would show! hummm



They threw gasoline on the fire and said "Burn baby burn," how could someone overlook that.


----------



## Mustang

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they didn't, quit with the lies. POLITICIANS managed to get the credit rating downgraded.
Click to expand...

 
Yeah, TEA PARTY politicians.  And the kook, Michele Bachmann, who's actually running for president voted against the compromise deal.  Does that mean she would have vetoed it if she were sitting in the Oval Office?  If she had, where do you think the DOW would be right now?  Maybe around 7,000 (which is about where it was when Obama took office)?  How about America's credit rating?  In the cellar, probably.


----------



## Full-Auto

Meister said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why dont you point out the breakdown of party affiliation of those polled before weighing in further.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is toxicmedia mute on the breakdown of party affiliation with this poll?  Couldn't be weighted like so many are....nah, what was I thinking.
Click to expand...


I am sure that omitting the breakdown was an accident. I mean its from Turner.


----------



## Mustang

realife said:


> Why in the hell are people getting on the Tea party? A person would have to really be inorant of how Broken Washington DC is if they really beleive that a group of about 60 House members in only 6 months could do all the damge some say. To me, blaming the A tea party(which its not a political party people) If like Blaming the guy who called 911 because a building was on fire. DC is on Fire and theese Patriots are calling 911!I wonder what a poll of peole who actually work and pay Taxes would show! hummm


 
Of all the words not to misspell, the word, "ignorant," has GOT to be at or near the top.


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
Click to expand...


Only the unintelligent believe that....


----------



## Meister

Mustang said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't, quit with the lies. POLITICIANS managed to get the credit rating downgraded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, TEA PARTY politicians.  And the kook, Michele Bachmann, who's actually running for president voted against the compromise deal.  Does that mean she would have vetoed it if she were sitting in the Oval Office?  If she had, where do you think the DOW would be right now?  Maybe around 7,000 (which is about where it was when Obama took office)?  How about America's credit rating?  In the cellar, probably.
Click to expand...


Drink some more Kool-Aid, sonny.  Our deficit and our spending got us where we are today.  Not the few that really tried to address the problem and not just put a bandaid on the wound.
If not for the fact that we keep having to raise the debt ceiling and out of control spending we still would have had the AAA rating.
If not for the fact that we didn't address the spending in a serious way and not with the smoke and mirrors from the politicians we would still have our AAA rating.
Now just go spin and blame like you have been doing since teflon obama has been in office.  I get it....but it's not fooling anyone.


----------



## toxicmedia

Full-Auto said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why dont you point out the breakdown of party affiliation of those polled before weighing in further.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is toxicmedia mute on the breakdown of party affiliation with this poll?  Couldn't be weighted like so many are....nah, what was I thinking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am sure that omitting the breakdown was an accident. I mean its from Turner.
Click to expand...

There aren't many unbiased pollsters these days. I mean they do sell their product to a biased media. Evenly weighted polling data doesn't sell. 

But the question is...how could anyone with intellectual integrity ever post polls they agree with? This whole dissmissal based on bais when you don't agree with the poll results, and posting away when you do agree is one of the tiresome aspects of some posts on sites like these.


----------



## Mustang

Dr.House said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only the unintelligent believe that....
Click to expand...

 
You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't, quit with the lies. POLITICIANS managed to get the credit rating downgraded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, TEA PARTY politicians.  And the kook, Michele Bachmann, who's actually running for president voted against the compromise deal.  Does that mean she would have vetoed it if she were sitting in the Oval Office?  If she had, where do you think the DOW would be right now?  Maybe around 7,000 (which is about where it was when Obama took office)?  How about America's credit rating?  In the cellar, probably.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Drink some more Kool-Aid, sonny.  Our deficit and our spending got us where we are today.  Not the few that really tried to address the problem and not just put a bandaid on the wound.
> If not for the fact that we keep having to raise the debt ceiling and out of control spending we still would have had the AAA rating.
> If not for the fact that we didn't address the spending in a serious way and not with the smoke and mirrors from the politicians we would still have our AAA rating.
> Now just go spin and blame like you have been doing since teflon obama has been in office.  I get it....but it's not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...


Spending has been going up year after year and will continue going up as long as the population grows and baby boomers keep retiring, to cut spending on those people would be to go back on a promise to them, they paid into it all their lives so what cut them? Where is proof of all this out of control spending?


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the unintelligent believe that....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
Click to expand...


You need to read the entire thing and not just one fucking sentence...


----------



## Meister

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> They managed to get America's credit rating downgraded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the unintelligent believe that....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
Click to expand...



Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party.  Go ahead  show all of us okay?

We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News


----------



## realife

Bass v 2.0 said:


> realife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why in the hell are people getting on the Tea party? A person would have to really be inorant of how Broken Washington DC is if they really beleive that a group of about 60 House members in only 6 months could do all the damge some say. To me, blaming the A tea party(which its not a political party people) If like Blaming the guy who called 911 because a building was on fire. DC is on Fire and theese Patriots are calling 911!I wonder what a poll of peole who actually work and pay Taxes would show! hummm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They threw gasoline on the fire and said "Burn baby burn," how could someone overlook that.
Click to expand...

They threw gasoline on the fire and said "Burn baby burn," how could someone overlook that. 
__________________
Isaiah                            Brother if you think 60 house Freshmen had enough power to do that, then you really need to quit drinking the Coolaid.   As for as the poll, why dont all of you go  out and ask any hard working person that pays taxes ,how they feel about the 51% of the people who pay nothing? I bet almost all these people say that everyone who gets a check should pay something.  Pretty soon the leeches are goona have nothing left to suck and then they will die.


----------



## 8537

Full-Auto said:


> 8537 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the Tea Party is in trouble - it's unfavorable rating is starting to approach the ratings for the Republican party!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it they did not post party affiliation of those polled?
Click to expand...


Did you read the link?


----------



## Dr.House

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the unintelligent believe that....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party.  Go ahead  show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
Click to expand...


Waste of time - you're dealing with the unintelligent...


----------



## Meister

Dr.House said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the state from S&P where it cites the Tea Party.  Go ahead  show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Waste of time - you're dealing with the unintelligent...
Click to expand...


I know, I know, but sometimes you have to rub their faces in it.


----------



## Auxous

I don't understand how a group of people doing God's work in trying to prevent an evil communist takeover are losing popularity.

I would figure that the populace would be more appreciative.


----------



## Full-Auto

8537 said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8537 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the Tea Party is in trouble - it's unfavorable rating is starting to approach the ratings for the Republican party!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it they did not post party affiliation of those polled?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you read the link?
Click to expand...


Thrice, As it was posted yesterday. If I did overlook it, please point it out.


----------



## Mustang

Dr.House said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Waste of time - you're dealing with the unintelligent...
Click to expand...

 
Really?  Intelligent people are not selective in their reading of the report.  I would also add that intelligent people wouldn't have let the whole debt ceiling process devolve into an 11th hour fiasco.  That's what the tea party Republicans accomplished all by their lonesome when they jettisoned the goal of getting the best possible deal to lower the national debt significantly by cutting spending AND raising revenue in favor of fighting an ideological battle where not raising ANY revenue whatsoever under any conditons was the Republican Party's primary goal, regardless of what happened as a result.



> The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policy making becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently.
> 
> Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Waste of time - you're dealing with the unintelligent...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  Intelligent people are not selective in their reading of the report.
> 
> <snip>
Click to expand...

I know, which is why you are unintelligent...  You selectively read the report...


----------



## driveby

Bass v 2.0 said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They destroyed the entire economy and were the cause of the credit downgrade according to leftist kook sellouts like yourself......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another shucking and jiving post from Mr:
Click to expand...


Another sellout post from the ultimate clown....


----------



## Mustang

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the unintelligent believe that....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
Click to expand...

 
It's amazing. Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill. I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.

Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences? I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.


----------



## Full-Auto

Mustang said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's amazing.  Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill.  I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences?  I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
Click to expand...


IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO.  Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.


----------



## Mustang

Dr.House said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Waste of time - you're dealing with the unintelligent...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Intelligent people are not selective in their reading of the report.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know, which is why you are unintelligent... You selectively read the report...
Click to expand...

 
I read the whole report and chose to include the parts of the report that were relevant to my statement which YOU, in turn, chose not to include in your cut and paste job because it repudiated your position.

In other words, it's just another day when conservatives get their hats handed to them in an argument when conservative propaganda and/or revisionism comes up against an opposing argument where logic and reason are valued over ideological purity tests.


----------



## BoycottTheday

Mustang said:


> [
> 
> It's amazing.  Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio,.



Good, call Dr. Savage and see how far you get debating him, and let us know so we can listen in to you telling him a thing or to.


----------



## Synthaholic

Full-Auto said:


> 8537 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the Tea Party is in trouble - it's unfavorable rating is starting to approach the ratings for the Republican party!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it they did not post party affiliation of those polled?
Click to expand...

Because polls don't do that.  They randomly select citizens, ensuring an even mix and no bias.


----------



## Meister

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Intelligent people are not selective in their reading of the report.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> 
> 
> I know, which is why you are unintelligent... You selectively read the report...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the whole report and chose to include the parts of the report that were relevant to my statement which YOU, in turn, chose not to include in your cut and paste job because it repudiated your position.
> 
> *In other words, it's just another day when conservatives get their hats handed to them in an argument when conservative propaganda and/or revisionism comes up against an opposing argument where logic and reason are valued over ideological purity tests*.
Click to expand...


The exact same thing could be said about the liberals in your statement.  No difference, so what's your point?


----------



## Mustang

Full-Auto said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing. Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill. I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences? I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO. Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
Click to expand...

 
That's merely conjecture.  In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (responsible for something like 60% of the debt) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.


----------



## Meister

Synthaholic said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8537 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the Tea Party is in trouble - it's unfavorable rating is starting to approach the ratings for the Republican party!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it they did not post party affiliation of those polled?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because polls don't do that.  They randomly select citizens, ensuring an even mix and no bias.
Click to expand...


Yeah, polls do that, or they won't know if they're getting an even mix or not, Synth.  Most polls will show the breakdown.


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Intelligent people are not selective in their reading of the report.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> 
> 
> I know, which is why you are unintelligent... You selectively read the report...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the whole report and chose to include the parts of the report that were relevant to my statement which YOU, in turn, chose not to include in your cut and paste job because it repudiated your position.
Click to expand...

In other words, you selectively picked out parts of the report which you "think" proves your point...  Whereas other intelligent people have read the entire report, taking all the words written by S&P, and came to the obvious conclusion that all parties are to blame for the downgrade...  This conclusion is contrary to your unintelligent conclusion...

Thank you for proving my point...  Again...


----------



## Meister

Mustang said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing. Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill. I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences? I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO. Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture.  In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (responsible for something like 60% of the debt) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
Click to expand...


The blame game again, huh? It's an old story that nobody is buying into


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing. Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill. I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences? I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO. Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture.  In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (*responsible for something like 60% of the debt*) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
Click to expand...


Got a link for that, sparky?


----------



## Synthaholic

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't, quit with the lies. POLITICIANS managed to get the credit rating downgraded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, TEA PARTY politicians.  And the kook, Michele Bachmann, who's actually running for president voted against the compromise deal.  Does that mean she would have vetoed it if she were sitting in the Oval Office?  If she had, where do you think the DOW would be right now?  Maybe around 7,000 (which is about where it was when Obama took office)?  How about America's credit rating?  In the cellar, probably.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Drink some more Kool-Aid, sonny.  Our deficit and our spending got us where we are today.  Not the few that really tried to address the problem and not just put a bandaid on the wound.
> If not for the fact that we keep having to raise the debt ceiling and out of control spending we still would have had the AAA rating.
> If not for the fact that we didn't address the spending in a serious way and not with the smoke and mirrors from the politicians we would still have our AAA rating.
> Now just go spin and blame like you have been doing since teflon obama has been in office.  I get it....but it's not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...

If that were true, then they would have downgraded us last month or 6 months ago or a year ago.

They didn't.

They waited until the agreement, which called for no additional revenues or taxation or ending any subsidy, THEN decided to downgrade us.

It's the Tea Party Downgrade.  They own it, and they celebrated it!


----------



## Synthaholic

Full-Auto said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing.  Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill.  I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences?  I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO*.  Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
Click to expand...



You are speaking directly out of your ass.


----------



## Synthaholic

BoycottTheday said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> It's amazing.  Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio,.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good, call Dr. Savage and see how far you get debating him, and let us know so we can listen in to you telling him a thing or to.
Click to expand...



"Dr. Savage"!!!


----------



## Dr.House

Synthaholic said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing.  Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill.  I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences?  I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO*.  Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are speaking directly out of your ass.
Click to expand...


^^ Ironic Post of the Day....



(you sure do win a lot of these, Synthia)


----------



## Meister

Synthaholic said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, TEA PARTY politicians.  And the kook, Michele Bachmann, who's actually running for president voted against the compromise deal.  Does that mean she would have vetoed it if she were sitting in the Oval Office?  If she had, where do you think the DOW would be right now?  Maybe around 7,000 (which is about where it was when Obama took office)?  How about America's credit rating?  In the cellar, probably.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drink some more Kool-Aid, sonny.  Our deficit and our spending got us where we are today.  Not the few that really tried to address the problem and not just put a bandaid on the wound.
> If not for the fact that we keep having to raise the debt ceiling and out of control spending we still would have had the AAA rating.
> If not for the fact that we didn't address the spending in a serious way and not with the smoke and mirrors from the politicians we would still have our AAA rating.
> Now just go spin and blame like you have been doing since teflon obama has been in office.  I get it....but it's not fooling anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If that were true, then they would have downgraded us last month or 6 months ago or a year ago.
> 
> They didn't.
> 
> They waited until the agreement, which called for no additional revenues or taxation or ending any subsidy, THEN decided to downgrade us.
> 
> It's the Tea Party Downgrade.  They own it, and they celebrated it!
Click to expand...


And I thought it was because it was the smoke and mirrors spending cuts....forgive me.


----------



## ShackledNation

Wait...are you really trying to base an argument off a poll controlled by CNN? Is this really the best you can do?


----------



## jgarden

*Currently, there are 3 political parties in America under the guise of 2.  

Many members of the Tea Party in Congress are not career politicians and therefore owe no real allegiance to the GOP.  The traditional means which Majority leaders were able to assert party discipline (earmarks, withholding campaign support) no longer apply.

The fact that the Tea Party and the GOP have banded together is strictly a marriage of convenience - the Republicans need the TP members to achieve their majority status in the House and the price of this support is that it allows the TP to exert far more political influence on legislation than their numbers would otherwise warrant.

Whether the public rewards or punishes the Tea Party in the next election, 3rd parties, in some form, will continue to be a fact of life on American political landscape.*


----------



## Mustang

Dr.House said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO. Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture. In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (*responsible for something like 60% of the debt*) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Got a link for that, sparky?
Click to expand...

 
I meant to say 60% of the deficit.

But I can provide a link to a chart that shows how the Bush tax cuts have impacted our debt to GDP ratio.  While the link takes you to the progressive site, The Center for American Progress, the chart itself is from information provided by the CBO and the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, both of which are nonpartisan sources of information.

The Bush Tax Cuts Are the Disaster that Keeps on Giving


----------



## ShackledNation

jgarden said:


> *Currently, there are 3 political parties in America under the guise of 2.
> 
> Many members of the Tea Party in Congress are not career politicians and therefore owe no real allegiance to the GOP.  The traditional means which Majority leaders were able to assert party discipline (earmarks, withholding campaign support) no longer apply.
> 
> The fact that the Tea Party and the GOP have banded together is strictly a marriage of convenience - the Republicans need the TP members to achieve their majority status in the House and the price of this support is that it allows the TP to exert far more political influence on legislation than their numbers would otherwise warrant.
> 
> Whether the public rewards or punishes the Tea Party in the next election, 3rd parties, in some form, will continue to be a fact of life on American political landscape.*


I would argue there are more or less only two parties. Democrats and Republicans sing a different song but end up pursuing similar policy. They both support big government. The Tea Party is the only party that seriously calls for limited government, and the only reason any Republican is saying the same is because the Tea Party has enough influence to force them to.


----------



## Oddball

jgarden said:


> *Currently, there are 3 political parties in America under the guise of 2.
> 
> Many members of the Tea Party in Congress are not career politicians and therefore owe no real allegiance to the GOP.  The traditional means which Majority leaders were able to assert party discipline (earmarks, withholding campaign support) no longer apply.
> 
> The fact that the Tea Party and the GOP have banded together is strictly a marriage of convenience - the Republicans need the TP members to achieve their majority status in the House and the price of this support is that it allows the TP to exert far more political influence on legislation than their numbers would otherwise warrant.
> 
> Whether the public rewards or punishes the Tea Party in the next election, 3rd parties, in some form, will continue to be a fact of life on American political landscape.*


Currently, there is _*one*_ political party  in this country, masquerading as two.

We don't need a 3rd party, we need a 2nd.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger

Hang on a moment, I think I just laughed up a kidney.. ROFLMAO!!!!!  I can see 2012 from my window!!! WOoooOOOooOOOoooOOot.. Team Tea Party Rockz!!


----------



## jgarden

ShackledNation said:


> ..... I would argue there are more or less only two parties. Democrats and Republicans sing a different song but end up pursuing similar policy. They both support big government. The Tea Party is the only party that seriously calls for limited government, and the only reason any Republican is saying the same is because the Tea Party has enough influence to force them to.


* I would argue that despite the political rhetoric, when it comes to "big government" and government spending, the Democrats and the Tea Party may have far more in common than meets the eye!  The main criticism that can be directed at Democratic presidents is that they haven't been able to reduce the debt/GDP ratio as fast as their Republican counterparts keep adding to it!

1.  When Carter left office in 1980, the debt/GDP ratio was 32.5%, the lowest point since WW2.

2.  Despite his renounciation of "big government, Reagan left office with a debt/GDP ratio of 53.1% - up  20.6%

3.  GHW Bush increased the debt/GDP ratio to 66.1% - up 13.0% 

4.  Clinton, the first Democratic president since Carter, decreased the debt/GDP to 56.4% - down 9.7%. 

5.  GW Bush increased the debt/GDP ratio to 84.2% - up 27.8%. 

6.  Obama is the only Democratic president since 1945, who has actually increased the debt/ GDP ratio.  By the end of 2010, the debt/GDP ratio had increased to 93.2% - up 9.0%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms*


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture. In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (*responsible for something like 60% of the debt*) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a link for that, sparky?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I meant to say 60% of the deficit.
> 
> But I can provide a link to a chart that shows how the Bush tax cuts have impacted our debt to GDP ratio.  While the link takes you to the progressive site, The Center for American Progress, the chart itself is from information provided by the CBO and the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, both of which are nonpartisan sources of information.
> 
> The Bush Tax Cuts Are the Disaster that Keeps on Giving
Click to expand...


Your link doesn't say that the Bush tax cuts are responsible for 60% of the deficit...

Got anything else to backup this claim? 

One that actually says what you say, if you don't mind...


----------



## Mr. Shaman

Synthaholic said:


> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the teabaggers, the more they don't like them.


Are you sure it isn't just the soundtrack?????

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p37MmbLgMH4]&#x202a;Tea Party Racism: The New Klan?&#x202c;&rlm; - YouTube[/ame]






​


----------



## JakeStarkey

Full-Auto said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party. Go ahead show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing.  Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill.  I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences?  I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO.  Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
Click to expand...


Not so, bozo.  You have nothing to base that comment on.  Such silliness by you and your comrades is one of the reasons the Tea Party plummets in popularity.


----------



## saveliberty

Observations:

1.  The poll did not disclose party affilliations.
2.  There is no actual Tea Party.
3.  It makes no estimate of number changes in affilliation for the Tea Party.
4.  The S&P reasoning for the downgrade reads like a Tea Party Primer.
5.  The numbers are remarkablly close to the number of people who have an unfavorable opinion of Obama.


----------



## thereisnospoon

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf


A CNN poll?..yep there's a really good chance there were unbiased questions.
Ok, we've lost a nano-second of sleep over this one.
As though we really care about what a bunch of uniformed boobs who actually have time to answer these idiotic polls, believe.
You libs actually thought the 2000 Presidential election was decided a week before Election Day 2000 based on polls.


----------



## Mr. Shaman

Oddball said:


> **yawn**


No *doubt!!*​


> "*Americans For Prosperity*, the *Tea Party astroturf group* founded and funded by infamous GOP rainmakers Charles and David Koch, *rolled into Jacksonville Tuesday, and only roughly 15 people showed up to their Running on Empty tour.*"
> 
> *Running On Empty*​


----------



## JakeStarkey

If you don't like CNN, post a general poll that supports the Tea Party position.

You won't find one.

Go to RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls and see what you find.


----------



## Synthaholic

Meister said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Drink some more Kool-Aid, sonny.  Our deficit and our spending got us where we are today.  Not the few that really tried to address the problem and not just put a bandaid on the wound.
> If not for the fact that we keep having to raise the debt ceiling and out of control spending we still would have had the AAA rating.
> If not for the fact that we didn't address the spending in a serious way and not with the smoke and mirrors from the politicians we would still have our AAA rating.
> Now just go spin and blame like you have been doing since teflon obama has been in office.  I get it....but it's not fooling anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> If that were true, then they would have downgraded us last month or 6 months ago or a year ago.
> 
> They didn't.
> 
> They waited until the agreement, which called for no additional revenues or taxation or ending any subsidy, THEN decided to downgrade us.
> 
> It's the Tea Party Downgrade.  They own it, and they celebrated it!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And I thought it was because it was the smoke and mirrors spending cuts....forgive me.
Click to expand...

OK - why weren't we downgraded the week or month before the deal?  The economic situation hasn't changed since the end of June....


----------



## JakeStarkey

The American population clearly see it as the Tea Party Downgrade.


----------



## 007

Synthaholic said:


> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the *teabagger*s, the more they don't like them.



And the more times you find to say "TEABAGGER," the more you get excited about the thought of some homo dropping his huge, sagging, sweaty BALL SACK in your fucking mouth.

Moron.


----------



## Synthaholic

Pale Rider said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the *teabagger*s, the more they don't like them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the more times you find to say "TEABAGGER," the more you get excited about the thought of some homo dropping his huge, sagging, sweaty BALL SACK in your fucking mouth.
> 
> Moron.
Click to expand...

Well, we know what's on YOUR mind!


----------



## Mr. Shaman

Synthaholic said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the *teabagger*s, the more they don't like them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the more times you find to say "TEABAGGER," the more you get excited about the thought of some homo dropping his huge, sagging, sweaty BALL SACK in your fucking mouth.
> 
> Moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, we know what's on YOUR mind!
Click to expand...

You noticed that, too, huh??

Ol' *Pale Rider* surely does get descriptive about such things.

​


----------



## Bass v 2.0

Has anyone notice that the right wingers have posted nothing but trolling posts? Look at Pale rider talking about his gay sex when it was a Tea Party follower that first called Teabagger a Teabagger.


----------



## ShackledNation

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Has anyone notice that the right wingers have posted nothing but trolling posts? Look at Pale rider talking about his gay sex when it was a Tea Party follower that first called Teabagger a Teabagger.


Has anyone noticed that the leftwingers have been doing the same thing? Lately all posts have been trolling posts. Its called partisan party politics. Many people on this site are simply mimicking our own government with their trolling.


----------



## Flopper

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the unintelligent believe that....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to read the statement that S&P released to explain why they did it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us in the statement from S&P where it cites the Tea Party.  Go ahead  show all of us okay?
> 
> We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
> We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
> The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
> More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
> Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
> The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
> S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
Click to expand...

I suggest you listen to the explanation from the horse's mouth.
S&P Credit Matters TV

S&P based their decision on two factors.
1. their projection for rising debt over next 10 years

2. their view that the two political sides can not work together to solve the problem.

All parties bear a share of the responsibility for not being able to agree on a plan to reduce the deficit sufficiently.  However, the Tea Party with it's intractable position on raising revenue bears most of the responsibility.  S&P established a negative outlook because of their belief that two sides will not be able to work together to take further steps to reduce the deficit.

IMHO, there will be no progress on further deficit reduction as long as the Tea Party is a force in the House.  With an economic slowdown and possible recession on the horizon, there will be a call for more federal aid from states and local government, not less.  Additional spending cuts would be devastating.   In this environment there would be no progress in reducing the deficit without revenue increases which the tea party would oppose.  All negotiations are based on the premise that that the two sides would rather agree than disagree.  That does not seem be the case with the Tea Party.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

> IMHO, there will be no progress on further deficit reduction as long as the Tea Party is a force in the House. With an economic slowdown and possible recession on the horizon, there will be a call for more federal aid from states and local government, not less. Additional spending cuts would be devastating. In this environment there would be no progress in reducing the deficit without revenue increases which the tea party would oppose. All negotiations are based on the premise that that the two sides would rather agree than disagree. That does not seem be the case with the Tea Party.


An accurate assessment. 

Indeed, there was no crisis prior to the TPMs contrivance of one. Debt reduction factors nowhere in the calculation of economic recovery. Its an issue better addressed after the economy is back on solid ground. The failure of the House, crippled by the radical extremism of the TPM, to enact meaningful jobs legislation and a comprehensive economic reform package caused the downgrade and the general pessimistic mood of investors wreaking havoc with the markets today.


----------



## Mustang

Dr.House said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got a link for that, sparky?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I meant to say 60% of the deficit.
> 
> But I can provide a link to a chart that shows how the Bush tax cuts have impacted our debt to GDP ratio. While the link takes you to the progressive site, The Center for American Progress, the chart itself is from information provided by the CBO and the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, both of which are nonpartisan sources of information.
> 
> The Bush Tax Cuts Are the Disaster that Keeps on Giving
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link doesn't say that the Bush tax cuts are responsible for 60% of the deficit...
> 
> Got anything else to backup this claim?
> 
> One that actually says what you say, if you don't mind...
Click to expand...

 
I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean.  I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures.  Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.

I've got a couple of links.

The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion

Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts

The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years.  However most of those cuts came in the later years.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf


----------



## saveliberty

Howard Dean?  The guy makes folks in straight jackets look sane.


----------



## Meister

Synthaholic said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> If that were true, then they would have downgraded us last month or 6 months ago or a year ago.
> 
> They didn't.
> 
> They waited until the agreement, which called for no additional revenues or taxation or ending any subsidy, THEN decided to downgrade us.
> 
> It's the Tea Party Downgrade.  They own it, and they celebrated it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I thought it was because it was the smoke and mirrors spending cuts....forgive me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK - why weren't we downgraded the week or month before the deal?  The economic situation hasn't changed since the end of June....
Click to expand...


Because S&P waited to see what the Bill would consist of, Synth.


----------



## Dr.House

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I meant to say 60% of the deficit.
> 
> But I can provide a link to a chart that shows how the Bush tax cuts have impacted our debt to GDP ratio. While the link takes you to the progressive site, The Center for American Progress, the chart itself is from information provided by the CBO and the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, both of which are nonpartisan sources of information.
> 
> The Bush Tax Cuts Are the Disaster that Keeps on Giving
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your link doesn't say that the Bush tax cuts are responsible for 60% of the deficit...
> 
> Got anything else to backup this claim?
> 
> One that actually says what you say, if you don't mind...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean.  I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures.  Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years.  However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
Click to expand...


Screamin' Howie Dean?

Seriously?

So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...

Thanks, I figured as much....


----------



## Political Junky

Synthaholic said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the *teabagger*s, the more they don't like them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the more times you find to say "TEABAGGER," the more you get excited about the thought of some homo dropping his huge, sagging, sweaty BALL SACK in your fucking mouth.
> 
> Moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, we know what's on YOUR mind!
Click to expand...

That's some vivid image he's got going.


----------



## Synthaholic

Meister said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I thought it was because it was the smoke and mirrors spending cuts....forgive me.
> 
> 
> 
> OK - why weren't we downgraded the week or month before the deal?  The economic situation hasn't changed since the end of June....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because S&P waited to see what the Bill would consist of, Synth.
Click to expand...

Exactly!  And when they saw that there were no revenues (due to tea party political brinksmanship), they downgraded us.

Absent the teabaggers' intransigence, there would have been and end to some subsidies, and closing of loopholes, at the very least.


----------



## Synthaholic

Dr.House said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your link doesn't say that the Bush tax cuts are responsible for 60% of the deficit...
> 
> Got anything else to backup this claim?
> 
> One that actually says what you say, if you don't mind...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean.  I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures.  Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years.  However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
Click to expand...

Bush shit the bed for eight years, but you hang onto one blown-up, media-exaggerated incident in front of a bunch of college students.


You have no integrity.


----------



## ShackledNation

Synthaholic said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK - why weren't we downgraded the week or month before the deal?  The economic situation hasn't changed since the end of June....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because S&P waited to see what the Bill would consist of, Synth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly!  And when they saw that there were no revenues (due to tea party political brinksmanship), they downgraded us.
> 
> Absent the teabaggers' intransigence, there would have been and end to some subsidies, and closing of loopholes, at the very least.
Click to expand...

The raise of the debt ceiling is why there was a downgrade simply because if the debt ceiling needed to be raised, it meant government did not raise revenue or cut spending enough. The debt ceiling was going to be raised for sure. The reason the US government was downgraded is because it is going more and more into debt.


----------



## Full-Auto

Synthaholic said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean.  I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures.  Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years.  However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bush shit the bed for eight years, but you hang onto one blown-up, media-exaggerated incident in front of a bunch of college students.
> 
> 
> You have no integrity.
Click to expand...


You are not one to be discussing integrity.


----------



## oreo

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf



Blaming the Tea Party movement in this country for the S & P downgrade is like blaming the Betty Ford Foundation for alcoholism.

It's very clear from this poll that there are a lot of uninformed Americans in this country--that continually listen to one line comments from the likes of John Kerry and David Axelrod--and Barack Obama that the tea party somehow caused this downgrade--when just opposite is the truth.  T_he Tea Party movement in this country has been out there for over 2 years warning of this oncoming train wreck in federal government (borrowing and spending.)_

Barack Obama and his administration were warned by his own congressional budget office over a year ago that his spending was unsustainable.  Moody's has been threatening to downgrade US debt for over a year now--if the President and democrat congress did not act.  All of this happened long before the new freshmen tea party members entered congress.

Furthermore--with tea party support--the house passed a bi-partisan bill that had democrat support--it was called the CUT-CAP--and Balance bill that according to a CNN poll had a 66% approval of the American public.

Two-thirds of Americans support House Cut Cap and Balance Plan | Conn Carroll | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Democrat senate leader Harry Reid immediately tabled it--refused to discuss it on the floor--and Barack Obama threatened to veto this bill if it got to his desk.  This bill would have more than satisfied the S & P and all other rating agencies.




The FACTS are--_Clinton spent 432 million a day--G.W. Bush spent 1.6 BILLION a day--and Barack Obama is spending 4.3 BILLION dollars a day. The Federal Government is currently borrowing .43 cents on every dollar it spends._


----------



## Flopper

I have not yet heard anyone with an answer to the key question, how do you provide economic stimulus to the economy while reducing the deficit?  The two most power tools we have for stimulating the economy are tax cuts and increased government spending.  Both would increase the deficit insuring another downgrade and still may not provide sufficient stimulus to fuel an economic expansion.  The person that can answer that question satisfactory should be the next president.


----------



## oreo

Synthaholic said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean.  I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures.  Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years.  However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bush shit the bed for eight years, but you hang onto one blown-up, media-exaggerated incident in front of a bunch of college students.
> 
> 
> You have no integrity.
Click to expand...


It must be hard for you to move forward when you're continually looking out your rear view mirror?--

Bush is no longer President--and he hasn't been in office for close to 3 years now.


----------



## JakeStarkey

None of this stuff on three pages negates that the Tea Party is plummeting in popular approval.


----------



## Meister

Synthaholic said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK - why weren't we downgraded the week or month before the deal?  The economic situation hasn't changed since the end of June....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because S&P waited to see what the Bill would consist of, Synth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly!  And when they saw that there were no revenues (due to tea party political brinksmanship), they downgraded us.
> 
> Absent the teabaggers' intransigence, there would have been and end to some subsidies, and closing of loopholes, at the very least.
Click to expand...


When they saw that the spending reduction was all smoke and mirrors they downgraded it, Synth.


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> None of this stuff on three pages negates that the Tea Party is plummeting in popular approval.



None of it shows how many people are involved, joining or leaving either.  What it did show was 21% of the respondents don't know who Harry Reid is and about the same percentage don't approve of Mr. Obama.  Guess his numbers are plummeting huh?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Harry has to deal with Harry.

The OP is that the Tea Party is plummeting dramtically, and that is a stone cold fact.


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> Harry has to deal with Harry.
> 
> The OP is that the Tea Party is plummeting dramtically, and that is a stone cold fact.



Is this the part where you get up on the ropes and spray the crowd with a beer?  

Wrestling isn't real either Jake.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Your deflections do nothing to mask that the Tea Party is falling dramtically in the estimation of the public, which may or may not hurt the GOP.

GOP leaders would be very smart to start separating themselves from TP clutches.


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> Your deflections do nothing to mask that the Tea Party is falling dramtically in the estimation of the public, which may or may not hurt the GOP.
> 
> GOP leaders would be very smart to start separating themselves from TP clutches.



Just sharing my Stone Cold Steve Austin flashback.   

The public didn't like idea of cuts to entitlements.  Big surprise there.  The Democrats better wake up and make some changes to the programs before we can't afford them at all.  Then we got real trouble.


----------



## naturegirl

The Tea Party isn't plummeting because of their ideals, the Tea Party is being attacked full force by the Mass Media.  People actually believe what some of those (cough, cough) journalists say.  

As the 2012 election draws closer, let's see what happens.  

Oh and I'd like to know what happened to support from the left for minorities??


----------



## Mustang

Dr.House said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your link doesn't say that the Bush tax cuts are responsible for 60% of the deficit...
> 
> Got anything else to backup this claim?
> 
> One that actually says what you say, if you don't mind...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean. I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures. Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years. However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
Click to expand...

 
Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.

A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate. I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard. That's one of the reasons I like him.

B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth. A lot of politicians fall into this category.

C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it. Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance. As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.

D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue. For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined. Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim. That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.

D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth. Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.


----------



## JakeStarkey

naturegirl said:


> The Tea Party isn't plummeting because of their ideals, the Tea Party is being attacked full force by the Mass Media.  People actually believe what some of those (cough, cough) journalists say.
> 
> As the 2012 election draws closer, let's see what happens.
> 
> Oh and I'd like to know what happened to support from the left for minorities??



Yes, the great majority of Americans do not like older, wealthier, whiter Tea Pots telling the younger, not as wealthy but on the move, darker, forward looking Americans, what their future should be.

The Tea Pots are falling because they are out of touch, period, with the rest of America, and the rest of America is not going to let the Tea Pots rule.


----------



## Avorysuds

JakeStarkey said:


> naturegirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party isn't plummeting because of their ideals, the Tea Party is being attacked full force by the Mass Media.  People actually believe what some of those (cough, cough) journalists say.
> 
> As the 2012 election draws closer, let's see what happens.
> 
> Oh and I'd like to know what happened to support from the left for minorities??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the great majority of Americans do not like older, wealthier, whiter Tea Pots telling the younger, not as wealthy but on the move, darker, forward looking Americans, what their future should be.
> 
> The Tea Pots are falling because they are out of touch, period, with the rest of America, and the rest of America is not going to let the Tea Pots rule.
Click to expand...


And I guess that makes you a racist... Not shocking really.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Recognizing demographical dzta, avory, is not racist.  You are racist for suggesting that recognizing reality is racist.  What a moron.


----------



## Avorysuds

JakeStarkey said:


> Recognizing demographical dzta, avory, is not racist.  You are racist for suggesting that recognizing reality is racist.  What a moron.



No, it's that you gleefully latch on to that "recognition" and spread the hate while you're in fact very wrong.


----------



## Avorysuds

What is amazing is that you put "blacker" rather than "whiter" in your sentance you would have never posted it because that form of bogotry is not accepatble to you.



"Yes, the great majority of Americans do not like older, wealthier, *blacker* Tea Pots telling the younger, not as wealthy but on the move, *lighter*, forward looking Americans, what their future should be."

Maybe you can get all these links that prove the tens of millions of TP people are all old and white and more so that they are telling "darker" people what their future *should* be...

You just got owned.


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> naturegirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party isn't plummeting because of their ideals, the Tea Party is being attacked full force by the Mass Media.  People actually believe what some of those (cough, cough) journalists say.
> 
> As the 2012 election draws closer, let's see what happens.
> 
> Oh and I'd like to know what happened to support from the left for minorities??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the great majority of Americans do not like older, wealthier, whiter Tea Pots telling the younger, not as wealthy but on the move, darker, forward looking Americans, what their future should be.
> 
> The Tea Pots are falling because they are out of touch, period, with the rest of America, and the rest of America is not going to let the Tea Pots rule.
Click to expand...


You were owned in the last election Jake.  Now the Tea Party ideals are taking hold in Congress.  All three ratings agencies for federal debt agree with the Tea Party.  Anyone who has run a household budget understands the risks of debt.  Stamp your feet all you want.  The check book is being taken away and you can't write a check you can't cover with cash.  Spoiled children often say they hate their parent when this happens.  Parents do it anyways.


----------



## Provocateur

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf



Wow.  Thank you for the heads up.  I'll anxiously await the referendum on conservative principles next November.


----------



## Provocateur

I see another Tea Party thread quickly went to the race card.


It is a shame that Democrats keep drilling this notion that minorities are despised and targeted by millions of people. 


I would say that you are successfully getting that into their minds.  You can look at the rage around you to determine that your strategy is working.

Happy?


----------



## Provocateur

And to add, OP, you do know that there is not a political party called the Tea Party, right?  It is everyday Americans (flyover country, I know, you can't relate) that want to see government smaller in scope.


Your title should have been something like "the embracing of conservative principles plummeting" if that is your point.


----------



## WillowTree

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean. I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures. Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years. However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate.  I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard.  That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth.  A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it.  Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance.  As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue.  For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined.  Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim.  That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true.  Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth.  Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
Click to expand...


Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports


----------



## WillowTree

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean. I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures. Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years. However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate.  I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard.  That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth.  A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it.  Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance.  As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue.  For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined.  Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim.  That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true.  Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth.  Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
Click to expand...


Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports


----------



## Meister

JakeStarkey said:


> naturegirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party isn't plummeting because of their ideals, the Tea Party is being attacked full force by the Mass Media.  People actually believe what some of those (cough, cough) journalists say.
> 
> As the 2012 election draws closer, let's see what happens.
> 
> Oh and I'd like to know what happened to support from the left for minorities??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the great majority of Americans do not like older, wealthier, whiter Tea Pots telling the younger, not as wealthy but on the move, darker, forward looking Americans, what their future should be.
> 
> The Tea Pots are falling because they are out of touch, period, with the rest of America, and the rest of America is not going to let the Tea Pots rule.
Click to expand...


This post is not one of your better posts, Jake, your better than this.


----------



## geauxtohell

toxicmedia said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pelosi at 31% ?  Bullshit........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before January I might have agreed...but she's been out of the news lately, and the Democrat's opinons of her don't change much anyway.
Click to expand...


Which is only logical as she is no longer the Speaker of the House. 

It looks like the public is going to, in part, assign blame for the credit downgrade to the House.  That means that Boeher and the now-associated with it Tea Party are going to catch some of the blow back.

I thought it was distasteful how both sides tried to blame the other for the problem.  It looks like the American people weren't fooled into forgetting their civics lessons (the house controls the purse strings).  

I also think the Tea Party came across as ignorant of fiscal policy in this whole deal.  Clearly failing to raise the debt ceiling would have been a disaster (if you doubt that, read the S&P report).

In truth, I think everyone is just sick of the whole deal.  I know I am.  It would be nice if we could work together to try and get something meaningful done.  I doubt that will happen.  However, the American people will not be kind to those who are seen to be obstructing the process.  

The cons on this board can act nonchalant about this, but you can beat the GOP is nervous.


----------



## Mustang

WillowTree said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate. I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard. That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth. A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it. Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance. As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue. For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined. Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim. That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth. Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
Click to expand...

 
The link doesn't go anywhere.


----------



## geauxtohell

WillowTree said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate.  I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard.  That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth.  A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it.  Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance.  As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue.  For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined.  Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim.  That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true.  Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth.  Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
Click to expand...


Maybe you should have read the actual poll.



> A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% of all Likely U.S. Voters believe the average member of the Tea Party has a better understanding of the problems America faces today, while 34% think the average member of Congress is more clued in. Twenty-four percent (24%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
> 
> *Still, that marks a 10-point drop in confidence in the Tea Party from March of last year when 52% felt the average member of the grass roots smaller government group had a better understanding of Americas problems. *But the new findings arent a big boost of confidence in Congress since theres been only a slight increase from the 30% in March 2010 who thought the average congressman had a better feel for the nations problems.
> 
> Sixty percent (60%) of Democrats, however, have more confidence in the average member of Congress. But 68% of Republicans - and a plurality (46%) of voters not affiliated with either major party  think the average Tea Party member has a better understanding of todays problems.
> 
> *Just 36% of all voters now have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party *which has come under fire from President Obama and congressional Democrats for pressuring Republicans into rejecting any tax increases as part of the recent deal to raise the federal debt ceiling. Forty-four percent (44%) view the Tea Party unfavorably, while 20% are not sure what they think of the group.



The TP is losing steam.  They are losing their "outsider" brand.  

It was destined to happen and the goofy cries of "Washington was more fundamentally broken then I could have ever imagined!" just sound idiotic.


----------



## Meister

geauxtohell said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate.  I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard.  That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth.  A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it.  Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance.  As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue.  For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined.  Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim.  That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true.  Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth.  Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe you should have read the actual poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% of all Likely U.S. Voters believe the average member of the Tea Party has a better understanding of the problems America faces today, while 34% think the average member of Congress is more clued in. Twenty-four percent (24%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
> 
> *Still, that marks a 10-point drop in confidence in the Tea Party from March of last year when 52% felt the average member of the grass roots smaller government group had a better understanding of Americas problems. *But the new findings arent a big boost of confidence in Congress since theres been only a slight increase from the 30% in March 2010 who thought the average congressman had a better feel for the nations problems.
> 
> Sixty percent (60%) of Democrats, however, have more confidence in the average member of Congress. But 68% of Republicans - and a plurality (46%) of voters not affiliated with either major party  think the average Tea Party member has a better understanding of todays problems.
> 
> *Just 36% of all voters now have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party *which has come under fire from President Obama and congressional Democrats for pressuring Republicans into rejecting any tax increases as part of the recent deal to raise the federal debt ceiling. Forty-four percent (44%) view the Tea Party unfavorably, while 20% are not sure what they think of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The TP is losing steam.  They are losing their "outsider" brand.
> 
> It was destined to happen and the goofy cries of "Washington was more fundamentally broken then I could have ever imagined!" just sound idiotic.
Click to expand...


The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all.   There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.


----------



## geauxtohell

Meister said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should have read the actual poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% of all Likely U.S. Voters believe the average member of the Tea Party has a better understanding of the problems America faces today, while 34% think the average member of Congress is more clued in. Twenty-four percent (24%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
> 
> *Still, that marks a 10-point drop in confidence in the Tea Party from March of last year when 52% felt the average member of the grass roots smaller government group had a better understanding of Americas problems. *But the new findings arent a big boost of confidence in Congress since theres been only a slight increase from the 30% in March 2010 who thought the average congressman had a better feel for the nations problems.
> 
> Sixty percent (60%) of Democrats, however, have more confidence in the average member of Congress. But 68% of Republicans - and a plurality (46%) of voters not affiliated with either major party  think the average Tea Party member has a better understanding of todays problems.
> 
> *Just 36% of all voters now have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party *which has come under fire from President Obama and congressional Democrats for pressuring Republicans into rejecting any tax increases as part of the recent deal to raise the federal debt ceiling. Forty-four percent (44%) view the Tea Party unfavorably, while 20% are not sure what they think of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The TP is losing steam.  They are losing their "outsider" brand.
> 
> It was destined to happen and the goofy cries of "Washington was more fundamentally broken then I could have ever imagined!" just sound idiotic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all.   There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.
Click to expand...


Frankly, I think that's a cop out.  

The TP came to town as the outsiders.  That gig is only going to last so long.  Eventually you are seen as the establishment.  It's just the nature of the best.  I think this _completely unnecessary_ debt ceiling crisis has hastened that.  I don't think the TP came out looking good in the whole deal.  In fact, I think they looked reckless and irresponsible.  S&P indicated that failing to raise the debt ceiling would have been a disaster and caused us to be downgraded even more so then we were.  

Blaming the MSM is an old dog that cons use.  I think it causes you to miss the big picture.  The American people are smart enough to realize that being obstinate at this point in time isn't the answer.  The TP comes across as obstinate.

Furthermore, in fairness, you have Boehner (not the TP admittedly) gloating about getting 98% of what he wanted in this compromise and the DEMS got shafted and folded up like a cheap tent from Sears.  Then the damn thing exploded anyways.  

Kind of hard for Boehner to pass the buck on the matter after that.  

I don't think it's the MSM.  I think the American people just saw through the whole ordeal, to include the smoke and mirrors.


----------



## saveliberty

The Tea Party losing steam, because they are losing the outside brand.  Funny.

The insiders are fighting spending cuts and balanced budgets.  The Tea Party is staying the course.

Basically the lower approval ratings are just insiders getting ticked by the outsiders and their success.


----------



## Gadawg73

I am optimistic that the American public has finally come awake.
The T Party latched onto the credit rating downgrade by Standard and Poors full steam.
T Party holds that new rating as credible and Standard and Poors as a credible agency to listen to.
And anyone that believes that would buy ocean front property in Macon, Ga.


----------



## oreo

Gadawg73 said:


> I am optimistic that the American public has finally come awake.
> The T Party latched onto the credit rating downgrade by Standard and Poors full steam.
> T Party holds that new rating as credible and Standard and Poors as a credible agency to listen to.
> And anyone that believes that would buy ocean front property in Macon, Ga.



Republicans/democrats/independents FAIL to realize that the ONLY bi-partisan group in this country today--is the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT.

40% or 4 in 10 members are DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS.

Survey: Four in 10 Tea Party members are Democrats or independents - The Hill's Ballot Box

Well --then these people are red neck *racist*--as Keith Olbermann stated--there is "no" color in this crowd.

*You might want to take a look at the Tea Parties different  "Colors" many of them guest speakers at rally's.*

Response to Olbermann: "People of color" at Tea Parties - YouTube

BLAMING the Tea Party in this country for the S & P downgrade is like blaming the Betty Ford Foundation for alcoholism. 

_It has been them that have been out there for 2-1/2 years warning of this oncoming train wreck of Federal Government borrowing and spending.  Liberals will NEVER like us--so they attack--Rino Republicans do not like us--so they will attack.  We have been called everything in the book including Nazi's--terrorists--and our best compliment of all from Rino John McCain--"Hobbits rising up from middle earth to defeat Mordor."  Everyone knows that in the Lord of the Rings epic--the ONLY ones you could trust with the ring--aka the Power--were Hobbits.

So I gladly take on the name of Hobbit.
_


----------



## naturegirl

Never mind, I'm still learning.  :blush:


----------



## geauxtohell

saveliberty said:


> The Tea Party losing steam, because they are losing the outside brand.  Funny.
> 
> The insiders are fighting spending cuts and balanced budgets.  The Tea Party is staying the course.
> 
> Basically the lower approval ratings are just insiders getting ticked by the outsiders and their success.



Oh, this was a poll of "insiders"?  

I don't think so.


----------



## saveliberty

geauxtohell said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tea Party losing steam, because they are losing the outside brand.  Funny.
> 
> The insiders are fighting spending cuts and balanced budgets.  The Tea Party is staying the course.
> 
> Basically the lower approval ratings are just insiders getting ticked by the outsiders and their success.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, this was a poll of "insiders"?
> 
> I don't think so.
Click to expand...


So by the definitions used on this thread, you think the Tea Party voted against themselves huh?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Avorysuds said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Recognizing demographical dzta, avory, is not racist.  You are racist for suggesting that recognizing reality is racist.  What a moron.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's that you gleefully latch on to that "recognition" and spread the hate while you're in fact very wrong.
Click to expand...


I am very right, and you, my little racist, are running for cover.

You can run, while the rest of us know you are done.


----------



## Toro

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf



Why do you libs hate America so much?











[/sarcasm]


----------



## Synthaholic

WillowTree said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate.  I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard.  That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth.  A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it.  Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance.  As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue.  For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined.  Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim.  That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true.  Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth.  Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
Click to expand...

They are part of Congress.


----------



## Synthaholic

Mustang said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate. I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard. That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth. A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it. Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance. As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue. For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined. Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim. That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth. Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The link doesn't go anywhere.
Click to expand...

Kinda like Willow Tree.


----------



## Synthaholic

Meister said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should have read the actual poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% of all Likely U.S. Voters believe the average member of the Tea Party has a better understanding of the problems America faces today, while 34% think the average member of Congress is more clued in. Twenty-four percent (24%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
> 
> *Still, that marks a 10-point drop in confidence in the Tea Party from March of last year when 52% felt the average member of the grass roots smaller government group had a better understanding of Americas problems. *But the new findings arent a big boost of confidence in Congress since theres been only a slight increase from the 30% in March 2010 who thought the average congressman had a better feel for the nations problems.
> 
> Sixty percent (60%) of Democrats, however, have more confidence in the average member of Congress. But 68% of Republicans - and a plurality (46%) of voters not affiliated with either major party  think the average Tea Party member has a better understanding of todays problems.
> 
> *Just 36% of all voters now have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party *which has come under fire from President Obama and congressional Democrats for pressuring Republicans into rejecting any tax increases as part of the recent deal to raise the federal debt ceiling. Forty-four percent (44%) view the Tea Party unfavorably, while 20% are not sure what they think of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The TP is losing steam.  They are losing their "outsider" brand.
> 
> It was destined to happen and the goofy cries of "Washington was more fundamentally broken then I could have ever imagined!" just sound idiotic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all.   There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.
Click to expand...

What about conservative media?  Innocent?


----------



## Meister

Synthaholic said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should have read the actual poll.
> 
> 
> 
> The TP is losing steam.  They are losing their "outsider" brand.
> 
> It was destined to happen and the goofy cries of "Washington was more fundamentally broken then I could have ever imagined!" just sound idiotic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all.   There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about conservative media?  Innocent?
Click to expand...


Oh, "Faux News"?


----------



## Synthaholic

Gadawg73 said:


> I am optimistic that the American public has finally come awake.
> The T Party latched onto the credit rating downgrade by Standard and Poors full steam.
> T Party holds that new rating as credible and Standard and Poors as a credible agency to listen to.
> *And anyone that believes that would buy ocean front property in Macon, Ga.*




Well, the old Macon Sheraton's lounge WAS called "_The Sand Trap_"!


----------



## Synthaholic

oreo said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am optimistic that the American public has finally come awake.
> The T Party latched onto the credit rating downgrade by Standard and Poors full steam.
> T Party holds that new rating as credible and Standard and Poors as a credible agency to listen to.
> And anyone that believes that would buy ocean front property in Macon, Ga.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Republicans/democrats/independents FAIL to realize that the ONLY bi-partisan group in this country today--is the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT.
> 
> 40% or 4 in 10 members are DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS.
> 
> Survey: Four in 10 Tea Party members are Democrats or independents - The Hill's Ballot Box
Click to expand...



That was 4/4/2010, moron.

The country has woken up since then.


----------



## Synthaholic

Meister said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all.   There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.
> 
> 
> 
> What about conservative media?  Innocent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, "Faux News"?
Click to expand...

FOX, Rush, Sean, Beck, LEVin (the self-hating Jew), "Dr." Savage (still laughing at that one...)


----------



## geauxtohell

Synthaholic said:


> oreo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am optimistic that the American public has finally come awake.
> The T Party latched onto the credit rating downgrade by Standard and Poors full steam.
> T Party holds that new rating as credible and Standard and Poors as a credible agency to listen to.
> And anyone that believes that would buy ocean front property in Macon, Ga.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Republicans/democrats/independents FAIL to realize that the ONLY bi-partisan group in this country today--is the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT.
> 
> 40% or 4 in 10 members are DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS.
> 
> Survey: Four in 10 Tea Party members are Democrats or independents - The Hill's Ballot Box
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That was 4/4/2010, moron.
> 
> The country has woken up since then.
Click to expand...


Before people figured out the TP was the GOP in Sheep's clothing.


----------



## skookerasbil

Who cares about the Tea Party except the internet OCD lefties and the handful of people who tune in MSNBC every night.

Heres the real poop..............new low for President Obama = 56% DISAPPROVE.

Obama Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports

Unfortunately for the k00ks, the "Tea Party" wont be on any ballot next November!!!


----------



## JakeStarkey

Obama, unfortunately for far right wacks, is still better off than the Tea Party, the GOP, Boehner, and Mitchell.

Only Giuliani, who is not running right now, a good solid liberal Republican, beats Obama head to head in polling.  Every other possible GOP candidate for the office is at least 5% points behind.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

> The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all. There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.



Nonsense. The MSM isnt liberal, its hardcore, free market capitalism  they broadcast what sells, what brings in ad revenue. Period.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.

The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Provocateur said:


> And to add, OP, you do know that there is not a political party called the Tea Party, right?  It is everyday Americans (flyover country, I know, you can't relate) that want to see government smaller in scope.
> .



Yeah, but the leftist media really hates Americans - I mean REALLY hates Americans. Rachel Maddow sees RED when she thinks about them...


----------



## JakeStarkey

More Americans dislike the Tea Party than the Dems, and more Americans dislike the Tea Party than the Pubs, and more Americans like Obama than they do Boehner, McConnell, the Pubs, the Dems, and the Tea Party.

Get back to cleaning the fryer, Uncensored.  You sound stupid here because you are stupid here.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Meister, the fact is that the Tea Party is out of touch with younger America.

The Tea Party will have some influence in older locales over the next year.

Tea Pots will have their fun in Iowa this week.

Then they will have to face the music over the next fifteen months.


----------



## geauxtohell

skookerasbil said:


> Who cares about the Tea Party except the internet OCD lefties and the handful of people who tune in MSNBC every night.
> 
> Heres the real poop..............new low for President Obama = 56% DISAPPROVE.
> 
> Obama Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Unfortunately for the k00ks, the "Tea Party" wont be on any ballot next November!!!



The "Tea Party Caucus" certainly cares about them.

Are you guys going to toss the TP under the bus now if they outlive their usefulness?


----------



## Flopper

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I first heard the figure of 60% from Howard Dean. I usually check numbers from people I don't know, but over the years I've found that Dean is spot on with his facts and figures. Finding the info myself is proving more difficult, especially since pdf files are not quite as user friendly.
> 
> I've got a couple of links.
> 
> The US Deficit for 2012 is about $1.1 Trillion
> 
> Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts
> 
> The Bush tax cuts have been estimated to have cost the treasury about $2 Trillion over ten years. However most of those cuts came in the later years.
> 
> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12187/ChangesBaselineProjections.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screamin' Howie Dean?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> So you admit you got nothing to backup the 60% claim...
> 
> Thanks, I figured as much....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate. I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard. That's one of the reasons I like him.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth. A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it. Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance. As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue. For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined. Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim. That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth. Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
Click to expand...

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either."
Albert Einstein


----------



## skookerasbil

geauxtohell said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares about the Tea Party except the internet OCD lefties and the handful of people who tune in MSNBC every night.
> 
> Heres the real poop..............new low for President Obama = 56% DISAPPROVE.
> 
> Obama Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Unfortunately for the k00ks, the "Tea Party" wont be on any ballot next November!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "Tea Party Caucus" certainly cares about them.
> 
> Are you guys going to toss the TP under the bus now if they outlive their usefulness?
Click to expand...


Dude.....Im on your side. Im just stating a political reality. The k00ks keep distracting with this nonsense about the Tea Party being responsible for this mess = laughable. The k00ks are watching thier ship sinking faster than a stone in water and their misery level is approaching the psych ward zone. Next year, there will be two people on the ticket: Obama and Nobama.......and thats it!!!


----------



## geauxtohell

skookerasbil said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares about the Tea Party except the internet OCD lefties and the handful of people who tune in MSNBC every night.
> 
> Heres the real poop..............new low for President Obama = 56% DISAPPROVE.
> 
> Obama Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Unfortunately for the k00ks, the "Tea Party" wont be on any ballot next November!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "Tea Party Caucus" certainly cares about them.
> 
> Are you guys going to toss the TP under the bus now if they outlive their usefulness?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude.....Im on your side. Im just stating a political reality. The k00ks keep distracting with this nonsense about the Tea Party being responsible for this mess = laughable. The k00ks are watching thier ship sinking faster than a stone in water and their misery level is approaching the psych ward zone. Next year, there will be two people on the ticket: Obama and Nobama.......and thats it!!!
Click to expand...


Oh, the tea party isn't responsible.  Luckily for them, rational adults were running their party and kept them from getting their way.  If they got their way, and the debt ceiling wasn't raised, it would have been a massive disaster and the bones would have been laid directly at the Tea Party's feet.  

Other than that, you might be the first con on here I've seen who views the TP with slightly less reverence then the second coming of Christ.  

These morons almost crashed our economy.  It's ironic that as bad as it was, it could have been much worse and the TP fuck-wits (i.e. Michelle Bachmann) have the gall to lecture the country over fiscal responsibility.


----------



## Full-Auto

Mustang said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate. I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard. That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth. A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it. Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance. As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue. For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined. Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim. That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth. Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The link doesn't go anywhere.
Click to expand...


WHAT????


new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% of all Likely U.S. Voters believe the average member of the Tea Party has a better understanding of the problems America faces today, while 34% think the average member of Congress is more clued in. Twenty-four percent (24%) are undecided.


----------



## Bigfoot

JakeStarkey said:


> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.



That is absolutely inaccurate. The American Left is shrinking in numbers and NBC and MSNBC's dismal ratings is just one of the indicators. Obama himself has also very likely done irreparable harm to the progressives.


----------



## Meister

Mustang said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Politics is an interesting "profession" with a wide array of approaches to swaying voters for (or against) one side or the other of any debate.
> 
> A. Some people use facts and figures that are accurate. I've found that Dean is pretty scrupulous in that regard. That's one of the reasons I like them.
> 
> B. Some people use accurate facts and figures but twist them in ways that essentially does more to distort the truth than reveal the truth. A lot of politicians fall into this category.
> 
> C. Some people use wholly innacurate "information" (disinformation, really) that they find somewhere and then repeat it. Michele Bachmann was guilty of that when she regurgitated inaccurate information that she found on some website which gave a wholly exaggerated estimation (along with false information) about the cost of one of Obama's overseas trips and how many US warships were in attendance. As I recall, the website wasn't even an American one.
> 
> D. Some people (again, like Bachmann) say things that they KNOW to be untrue. For example, on the campaign trail, Bachmann has repeatedly said that Obama has racked up more debt than all other presidents combined. Even when she was informed by aides that the statement was not true, she continues, to this day, to make the claim. That fact alone makes a mockery out of her claim to be a moral and honest candidate because it's one thing to unwittingly make an inaccurate statement, but it's another thing altogether to continue to make that statement after you've been informed that it isn't true. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Bachmann has such a high turnover with her staff.
> 
> D. Some people just make shit up out of whole cloth. Conservative talk radio hosts fit neatly into that category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The link doesn't go anywhere.
Click to expand...


Perhaps, if you get your mom to ease up the parental filter on the computer it will pop up.


----------



## Full-Auto

Meister said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> 
> Voters Still Express More Confidence in Tea Party Than in Congress - Rasmussen Reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The link doesn't go anywhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps, if you get your mom to ease up the parental filter on the computer it will pop up.
Click to expand...


MY BAD I laughed.


----------



## Meister

Bigfoot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is absolutely inaccurate. The American Left is shrinking in numbers and NBC and MSNBC's dismal ratings is just one of the indicators. Obama himself has also very likely done irreparable harm to the progressives.
Click to expand...


The biggest loss for obama is with the independents....he lost a lot in that category.


----------



## ShackledNation

JakeStarkey said:


> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.


Utter bullshit. The mainstream media is corporatist to the bone.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> More Americans dislike the Tea Party than the Dems,



Jake, you're a stupid guy - a REALLY stupid guy.

The "Tea Party" is a series of protests. Initially these were spontaneous in nature, later they were coopted by the Republicans. Once the GOP got their hooks in, the nature of the Tea Party changed. 

I don't say this for you, Jake - you are a drooling imbecile, I post this for general consumption. The first Tea Party I was exposed to was aimed squarely at the Republicans, when Bush and McCain were pushing their amnesty scheme. 

SINCE democrats are in general even more fucked up than Republicans, there has been more focus on them and their attacks on the working America.

What you're too fucking stupid to comprehend Jake, and why you'll spend your life cooking fries, is that the Tea Parties are not a political party, they are a protest. They have had impact and will continue to do so. 

Tea Parties are regular Americans standing up to the government.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Full-Auto, you disrepect those close to you with your foul mouth.

The Tea Party protest (movement) (troop) (whatever) is now in the toilet with the rest of America.

Since the TeaPots are associated with a real party, the GOP, the Pubs don't want the TeaPots making anymore stupid actions.  However, with the TeaParty caucus in Congress a conglomerate of the politically and economically and culturally challenged in America, the TeaPots are going to continue to hurt GOP chances.


----------



## Full-Auto

JakeStarkey said:


> Full-Auto, you disrepect those close to you with your foul mouth.
> 
> The Tea Party protest (movement) (troop) (whatever) is now in the toilet with the rest of America.
> 
> Since the TeaPots are associated with a real party, the GOP, the Pubs don't want the TeaPots making anymore stupid actions.  However, with the TeaParty caucus in Congress a conglomerate of the politically and economically and culturally challenged in America, the TeaPots are going to continue to hurt GOP chances.



The tea party took a hit and still has better ratings then the president.

I only need to ask you one question...........

WHICH SIDE OF YOUR ASS ARE YOU TALKING NOW?


----------



## JakeStarkey

No, the Tea Party does not have better ratings than the president.

Where are you pulling this stuff out of?


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> No, the Tea Party does not have better ratings than the president.



Jake, when you pray to Obama, do you face Mecca?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Uncensored, you are showing your ass again.  I do not want Obama and I do not want the Tea Party.  We need some sensible people and decision making ability, and if you are the example of the wack far right, we don't need you.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> Uncensored, you are showing your ass again.



Where am I showing you?



> I do not want Obama



ROFL

Yeah, that's why you have him as your fucking avatar....

What a fool you are, thinking you can lie and no one will notice...


----------



## BDBoop

JakeStarkey said:


> Obama, unfortunately for far right wacks, is still better off than the Tea Party, the GOP, Boehner, and Mitchell.
> 
> Only Giuliani, who is not running right now, a good solid liberal Republican, beats Obama head to head in polling.  Every other possible GOP candidate for the office is at least 5% points behind.



Any chance whatsoever that Giuliani might run?


----------



## Synthaholic

Bigfoot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is absolutely inaccurate. *The American Left is shrinking in numbers* and NBC and MSNBC's dismal ratings is just one of the indicators. Obama himself has also very likely done irreparable harm to the progressives.
Click to expand...


Which orifice did you pull this out of?

And NBC/MSNBC's ratings are just fine.


----------



## Synthaholic

ShackledNation said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> Utter bullshit. The mainstream media is corporatist to the bone.
Click to expand...

Aren't corporations capitalist?


----------



## Synthaholic

Full-Auto said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto, you disrepect those close to you with your foul mouth.
> 
> The Tea Party protest (movement) (troop) (whatever) is now in the toilet with the rest of America.
> 
> Since the TeaPots are associated with a real party, the GOP, the Pubs don't want the TeaPots making anymore stupid actions.  However, with the TeaParty caucus in Congress a conglomerate of the politically and economically and culturally challenged in America, the TeaPots are going to continue to hurt GOP chances.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The tea party took a hit and still has better ratings then the president.*
> 
> I only need to ask you one question...........
> 
> WHICH SIDE OF YOUR ASS ARE YOU TALKING NOW?
Click to expand...

Why don't you prove that with a link?


----------



## JimH52

The Baggers are extremist who are represented by "I wish we had defaulted" Bachmann.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Synthaholic said:


> And NBC/MSNBC's ratings are just fine.



Your avatar fits you perfectly.

Are you satire? Are you mocking the delusional leftists?


----------



## Full-Auto

JakeStarkey said:


> No, the Tea Party does not have better ratings than the president.
> 
> Where are you pulling this stuff out of?



Try going through the thread. Clink on a few links.

Can you handle that much or do you still need your hand held?


----------



## Synthaholic

Full-Auto said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, the Tea Party does not have better ratings than the president.
> 
> Where are you pulling this stuff out of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try going through the thread. Clink on a few links.
> 
> Can you handle that much or do you still need your hand held?
Click to expand...

I need my hand held.  Show me exactly where any poll puts teabaggers' approval ratings higher than President Obama (peace be unto him).


----------



## Full-Auto

Synthaholic said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, the Tea Party does not have better ratings than the president.
> 
> Where are you pulling this stuff out of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try going through the thread. Clink on a few links.
> 
> Can you handle that much or do you still need your hand held?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I need my hand held.  Show me exactly where any poll puts teabaggers' approval ratings higher than President Obama (peace be unto him).
Click to expand...


I knew you would.....

Go back through and click the link to Rasmussen.


----------



## mudwhistle

People are still watching CNN?


----------



## Synthaholic

Full-Auto said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try going through the thread. Clink on a few links.
> 
> Can you handle that much or do you still need your hand held?
> 
> 
> 
> I need my hand held.  Show me exactly where any poll puts teabaggers' approval ratings higher than President Obama (peace be unto him).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I knew you would.....
> 
> Go back through and click the link to Rasmussen.
Click to expand...

What link to Rasmussen?  I started this thread with a link to a CNN poll.

Point out this link.


----------



## Full-Auto

Synthaholic said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I need my hand held.  Show me exactly where any poll puts teabaggers' approval ratings higher than President Obama (peace be unto him).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I knew you would.....
> 
> Go back through and click the link to Rasmussen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What link to Rasmussen?  I started this thread with a link to a CNN poll.
> 
> Point out this link.
Click to expand...


Rasmussen confirms most do not see Tea Party as terrorists despite propaganda - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com

Would you also like the disapproval numbers of the president? Or the wrong track numbers?


----------



## Synthaholic

Full-Auto said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> I knew you would.....
> 
> Go back through and click the link to Rasmussen.
> 
> 
> 
> What link to Rasmussen?  I started this thread with a link to a CNN poll.
> 
> Point out this link.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rasmussen confirms most do not see Tea Party as terrorists despite propaganda - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com
> 
> Would you also like the disapproval numbers of the president? Or the wrong track numbers?
Click to expand...



Nowhere in that article does any poll put teabagger approval ratings above President Obama (salaam alaikum!)

Negged for being a liar!


----------



## Synthaholic

Synthaholic said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What link to Rasmussen?  I started this thread with a link to a CNN poll.
> 
> Point out this link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rasmussen confirms most do not see Tea Party as terrorists despite propaganda - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com
> 
> Would you also like the disapproval numbers of the president? Or the wrong track numbers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nowhere in that article does any poll put teabagger approval ratings above President Obama (salaam alaikum!)
> 
> Negged for being a liar!
Click to expand...

From your own link:


*Still, a plurality (43%) of all voters think the Tea Party has made  things worse of the country in the budget debates in Congress.*  Thirty-two percent (32%) say the Tea Party has made things better for  America, and 14% say it&#8217;s had no impact. Eleven percent (11%) are  undecided.
​


----------



## Uncensored2008

mudwhistle said:


> People are still watching CNN?



CNN, MSNBC and CNBC combined don't pull the share that Fox News does.

Cable News Ratings for Wednesday, August 10, 2011 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers


----------



## BDBoop

naturegirl said:


> The Tea Party isn't plummeting because of their ideals, the Tea Party is being attacked full force by the Mass Media.  People actually believe what some of those (cough, cough) journalists say.
> 
> As the 2012 election draws closer, let's see what happens.
> 
> Oh and I'd like to know what happened to support from the left for minorities??



"cough, cough journalists?" I don't suppose you're thinking of Faux News, are ya.


----------



## Bigfoot

Synthaholic said:


> Bigfoot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is absolutely inaccurate. *The American Left is shrinking in numbers* and NBC and MSNBC's dismal ratings is just one of the indicators. Obama himself has also very likely done irreparable harm to the progressives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which orifice did you pull this out of?
> 
> And NBC/MSNBC's ratings are just fine.
Click to expand...


I am finding it difficult to believe that you are being serious here. It is well known that MSNBCs ratings are always low.  Google TV news ratings, I did, every link shows consistently that MSNBC has a small market share when compared to FOX news broadcasts who consistently lead by large margins. 

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/05/20/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-may-19-2011/93467/

Here is one link and you can easily find dozens more. Take a moment and educate yourself unless you would rather stay with you're wishful thinking. You're posts on this matter are incorrect.


----------



## Full-Auto

Synthaholic said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What link to Rasmussen?  I started this thread with a link to a CNN poll.
> 
> Point out this link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rasmussen confirms most do not see Tea Party as terrorists despite propaganda - Spokane Conservative | Examiner.com
> 
> Would you also like the disapproval numbers of the president? Or the wrong track numbers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nowhere in that article does any poll put teabagger approval ratings above President Obama (salaam alaikum!)
> 
> Negged for being a liar!
Click to expand...


That would have required thinking and comparisons. I understand why you dont get it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

And, as the Tea Party approval among informed and well read Americans, drops:

Obama is less than a point behind a generic GOP candidate.

He is more than 50 points better in the spread on job approval than Congress, which is absolutely abysmal.

Obama is 3.2 points ahead of Romney.

Obama is more than 10 points ahead of Perry.

Obama is almost 11 points ahead of Pawlenty.

Obama is more than 11 points ahead of Bachmann.

Obama is 14 points ahead of Huntsman.

Obama is more than 17 points ahead of Palin.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - President Obama vs. Republican Candidate

RealClearPolitics - President Obama vs. Republican Candidates


----------



## saveliberty

The most interesting detail you left out Jake is Obama has over a year to screw up even more.


----------



## JakeStarkey

An interesting detail, saveliberty, is that the Tea Party, the Dems, the Pubs, and the American people have more than a year to screw up with Obama.  The most interesting thing is that We the People don't think any outstanding alternative to the President exists right now.

We need to get our house in order.


----------



## oreo

BDBoop said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama, unfortunately for far right wacks, is still better off than the Tea Party, the GOP, Boehner, and Mitchell.
> 
> Only Giuliani, who is not running right now, a good solid liberal Republican, beats Obama head to head in polling.  Every other possible GOP candidate for the office is at least 5% points behind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any chance whatsoever that Giuliani might run?
Click to expand...


I don't think so.  It's kind of late to jump in here at this time.  In fact Perry is supposed to announce--but I really don't think he has a shot--he has 3 strikes against him--just coming out of Texas--plus he is way to far right on social issues--which would scare independents away.


----------



## oreo

JakeStarkey said:


> An interesting detail, saveliberty, is that the Tea Party, the Dems, the Pubs, and the American people have more than a year to screw up with Obama.  The most interesting thing is that We the People don't think any outstanding alternative to the President exists right now.
> 
> We need to get our house in order.



There are plenty of alternatives to Obama--right he is his own worst enemy--and at this time is being compared to Jimmy Carter by democrats.  A President that leads from the REAR.  Carter did the same thing.  Both with very high I.Q's--but incapable of being a leader.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> Obama is 3.2 points ahead of Romney.



Then you have nothing to worry about, Jake. Your Messiah® will win. No need for you to fill your trunk with ballots. Hand out crack to indigents to vote for him, get illegals voting. You can just sit back and relax. For the first time in the last century, a democrat will win without the use of fraud.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Guys, show me who is leading Obama among the GOP, other than Rudy, who is not running.  I wonder if he would take a Veep slot with Romney or Perry.  That would strengthen the ticket in reaching out to independents, centrists, and conservative Dems.


----------



## Full-Auto

Neotrotsky said:


> *RINO UPDATE I: Romney Signs Pro-Straight Marriage Pledge with Tea Party Supporter Bachmann*
> Romney looks to Tea Party for leadership on some issues
> 
> Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum have signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage to oppose gay marriage at several levels of the federal government. But former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who has sought to burnish his credentials as an evangelical Christian, declined to sign it, possibly putting him at odds with the social conservatives he is trying to court in Iowa. The National Organization for Marriage is running a four-day Iowa bus tour leading up to the Aug. 13 straw poll in Ames.
> 
> * RINO UPDATE II*
> Are RINOs too extreme for either side?
> 
> VIDEO: More fake companies give millions to Mitt Romney | The Political Carnival
> PROVO, Utah A political committee tied to Mitt Romney received two separate $1 million donations from companies located in Provo, but the companies dont appear to do any substantial business.
> 
> *RINO UPDATE III
> *
> Mitt Romney Supports on Cut, Cap and Balance in Debate follows Tea Party ideas
> Again http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61151.html
> -------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> Guys, show me who is leading Obama among the GOP, other than Rudy, who is not running.



{The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 20% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -22 (see trends). }

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports&#8482;

You know who can beat Obama in 2012?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Uncensored is busily trying to hide the rest of the polling from Real Clear Politics behind the curtain.

"Don't look behind the curtain," goes Wizard Uncensored.  

RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> Uncensored is busily trying to hide the rest of the polling from Real Clear Politics behind the curtain.
> 
> "Don't look behind the curtain," goes Wizard Uncensored.



Someone is hiding, anyway...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, TEA PARTY politicians.  And the kook, Michele Bachmann, who's actually running for president voted against the compromise deal.  Does that mean she would have vetoed it if she were sitting in the Oval Office?  If she had, where do you think the DOW would be right now?  Maybe around 7,000 (which is about where it was when Obama took office)?  How about America's credit rating?  In the cellar, probably.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drink some more Kool-Aid, sonny.  Our deficit and our spending got us where we are today.  Not the few that really tried to address the problem and not just put a bandaid on the wound.
> If not for the fact that we keep having to raise the debt ceiling and out of control spending we still would have had the AAA rating.
> If not for the fact that we didn't address the spending in a serious way and not with the smoke and mirrors from the politicians we would still have our AAA rating.
> Now just go spin and blame like you have been doing since teflon obama has been in office.  I get it....but it's not fooling anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Spending has been going up year after year and will continue going up as long as the population grows and baby boomers keep retiring, to cut spending on those people would be to go back on a promise to them, they paid into it all their lives so what cut them? Where is proof of all this out of control spending?
Click to expand...


to cut spending on those people would be to go back on a promise to them, they paid into it all their lives so what cut them?

Yes, we're going to have to cut back on those promises.

Where is proof of all this out of control spending?

You're joking, right?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Mustang said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing. Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill. I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences? I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO. Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture.  In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (responsible for something like 60% of the debt) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
Click to expand...


it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (responsible for something like 60% of the debt)
$8.4 trillion? Please show all your work.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Mustang said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture. In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (*responsible for something like 60% of the debt*) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a link for that, sparky?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I meant to say 60% of the deficit.
> 
> But I can provide a link to a chart that shows how the Bush tax cuts have impacted our debt to GDP ratio.  While the link takes you to the progressive site, The Center for American Progress, the chart itself is from information provided by the CBO and the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, both of which are nonpartisan sources of information.
> 
> The Bush Tax Cuts Are the Disaster that Keeps on Giving
Click to expand...


I meant to say 60% of the deficit
$840 billion? Please show your work.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Full-Auto said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try going through the thread. Clink on a few links.
> 
> Can you handle that much or do you still need your hand held?
> 
> 
> 
> I need my hand held.  Show me exactly where any poll puts teabaggers' approval ratings higher than President Obama (peace be unto him).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I knew you would.....
> 
> Go back through and click the link to Rasmussen.
Click to expand...


The link does not report that at all.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Here is the link to all of the polls.  RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls

The Tea Retches are lying as usual.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Flopper said:


> I have not yet heard anyone with an answer to the key question, how do you provide economic stimulus to the economy while reducing the deficit?  The two most power tools we have for stimulating the economy are tax cuts and increased government spending.  Both would increase the deficit insuring another downgrade and still may not provide sufficient stimulus to fuel an economic expansion.  The person that can answer that question satisfactory should be the next president.



 how do you provide economic stimulus to the economy while reducing the deficit?

Reduce the regulation that is strangling our economy.
Start by repealing Obamacare.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Our economy is the least regulated in the world, todd.  You are going to have to come up with a far better answer than that throwaway remark.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Mitt Romney is playing the far right wacks for the fools they truly seem to be.  Good for him.


----------



## JakeStarkey

NeoFascist believes in Ayn Rand, nuff said. 

You are surely not suggesting that your weird beliefs are mainstream? That is the best laugh of the day.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

geauxtohell said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should have read the actual poll.
> 
> 
> 
> The TP is losing steam.  They are losing their "outsider" brand.
> 
> It was destined to happen and the goofy cries of "Washington was more fundamentally broken then I could have ever imagined!" just sound idiotic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The liberal MSM has a role in what is happening....I mean they talk about all those violent terrorist racists and all.   There are enough dumb people who actually believe that, G.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, I think that's a cop out.
> 
> The TP came to town as the outsiders.  That gig is only going to last so long.  Eventually you are seen as the establishment.  It's just the nature of the best.  I think this _completely unnecessary_ debt ceiling crisis has hastened that.  I don't think the TP came out looking good in the whole deal.  In fact, I think they looked reckless and irresponsible.  S&P indicated that failing to raise the debt ceiling would have been a disaster and caused us to be downgraded even more so then we were.
> 
> Blaming the MSM is an old dog that cons use.  I think it causes you to miss the big picture.  The American people are smart enough to realize that being obstinate at this point in time isn't the answer.  The TP comes across as obstinate.
> 
> Furthermore, in fairness, you have Boehner (not the TP admittedly) gloating about getting 98% of what he wanted in this compromise and the DEMS got shafted and folded up like a cheap tent from Sears.  Then the damn thing exploded anyways.
> 
> Kind of hard for Boehner to pass the buck on the matter after that.
> 
> I don't think it's the MSM.  I think the American people just saw through the whole ordeal, to include the smoke and mirrors.
Click to expand...


The TP comes across as obstinate
They are obstinate against more spending and more taxes.


----------



## JakeStarkey

NeoFascist is having an attack of e-net Tourette's Syndrome!


----------



## JakeStarkey

NeoFascist is having an attack of e-net Tourette's Syndrome!


----------



## mudwhistle

JakeStarkey said:


> And, as the Tea Party approval among informed and well read Americans, drops:
> 
> Obama is less than a point behind a generic GOP candidate.
> 
> He is more than 50 points better in the spread on job approval than Congress, which is absolutely abysmal.
> 
> Obama is 3.2 points ahead of Romney.
> 
> Obama is more than 10 points ahead of Perry.
> 
> Obama is almost 11 points ahead of Pawlenty.
> 
> Obama is more than 11 points ahead of Bachmann.
> 
> Obama is 14 points ahead of Huntsman.
> 
> Obama is more than 17 points ahead of Palin.
> 
> RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - President Obama vs. Republican Candidate
> 
> RealClearPolitics - President Obama vs. Republican Candidates



You do know that until the primaries are done the conservative vote is split, don't you?

I think if you were to ask Deomocrat voters who they favor, Hillary or Obama the results would be devastating for the man-child.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Of course, the cons are split.  We all know that.  I suspect that if Bachmann finishes in the top three or four she will fight Perry for a long time, which allows Romney to skate along just every so little to their left.  When Perry finally puts Bachmann away for good, what the TeaPots do at that point will determine whether the GOP can field a reasonable opponent to Obama.  If the TeaPots bolt the GOP and try a third-party effort, we get your hero for another four years.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Synthaholic said:


> ShackledNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> Utter bullshit. The mainstream media is corporatist to the bone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Aren't corporations capitalist?
Click to expand...


Are the New York Times and Washington Post capitalist?


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> NeoFascist believes in Ayn Rand, nuff said.



Jake, we all know that you're stupid. No need to try so hard to underscore that point. It's why you're such a partisan democrat.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Our economy is the least regulated in the world, todd.  You are going to have to come up with a far better answer than that throwaway remark.



Least regulated?
That's funny.
How many pages is our tax code?
How about the Federal Register?


----------



## JakeStarkey

And NeoFascist continues his e-net Tourette's Syndrome here.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our economy is the least regulated in the world, todd.  You are going to have to come up with a far better answer than that throwaway remark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Least regulated?
> That's funny.
> How many pages is our tax code?
> How about the Federal Register?
Click to expand...


Todd, none of that matters when compared to the rest of the industrialized world, particularly European and modern Taiwan and Japan.

You really need to study.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our economy is the least regulated in the world, todd.  You are going to have to come up with a far better answer than that throwaway remark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Least regulated?
> That's funny.
> How many pages is our tax code?
> How about the Federal Register?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Todd, none of that matters when compared to the rest of the industrialized world, particularly European and modern Taiwan and Japan.
> 
> You really need to study.
Click to expand...



Country rankings for trade, business, fiscal, monetary, financial, labor and investment freedoms

Our rank is slipping.


----------



## Synthaholic

JakeStarkey said:


> *Uncensored is busily trying to hide* the rest of the polling from Real Clear Politics behind the curtain.
> 
> "Don't look behind the curtain," goes Wizard Uncensored.
> 
> RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls




Uncensored is a fucking moron.  But you knew that.


----------



## Indy Terry

I want to act like the rest of this board and act like the politicians in Washington. I would post a picture of my junk but it's piled too high in my living room.


----------



## Meister

Indy Terry said:


> I want to act like the rest of this board and act like the politicians in Washington. I would post a picture of my junk but it's piled too high in my living room.



You show us a picture of "your junk", and your banned for good.  No porn on this site.


----------



## Chris

Synthaholic said:


> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf




The American people understand who the traitors are.


----------



## saveliberty

New voter poll out in Wisconsin.  We win.


----------



## JakeStarkey

saveliberty said:


> New voter poll out in Wisconsin.  We win.



Give us a link, save.


----------



## Neotrotsky

*RINO UPDATE I: Romney Signs Pro-Straight Marriage Pledge with Tea Party Supporter Bachmann*
 Romney looks to Tea Party for leadership on some issues

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum have signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage to oppose gay marriage at several levels of the federal government. But former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who has sought to burnish his credentials as an evangelical Christian, declined to sign it, possibly putting him at odds with the social conservatives he is trying to court in Iowa. The National Organization for Marriage is running a four-day Iowa bus tour leading up to the Aug. 13 straw poll in Ames.

* RINO UPDATE II*
 Are RINOs too extreme for either side?

VIDEO: More fake companies give millions to Mitt Romney | The Political Carnival
 PROVO, Utah&#8212; A political committee tied to Mitt Romney received two separate $1 million donations from companies located in Provo, but the companies don&#8217;t appear to do any substantial business.

*RINO UPDATE III
*
Mitt Romney Supports on Cut, Cap and Balance in Debate follows Tea Party ideas
Again http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61151.html

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2h8ujX6T0A"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2h8ujX6T0A[/ame]


----------



## JakeStarkey

These moves are brillant by Romney, co-opting the TeaPots to his mainstream Republicanism.  He will survive in Iowa, capture New Hampshire, then watch Perry and Bachmann bloody each other in South Carolina as he emerges as the clear front runner.

Good posts, NeoFascist.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our economy is the least regulated in the world, todd.  You are going to have to come up with a far better answer than that throwaway remark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Least regulated?
> That's funny.
> How many pages is our tax code?
> How about the Federal Register?
Click to expand...



I hear you
The guy supports Rousseau the &#8220;the father of modern fascism"
pretty radical - so there is never enough regulation for those types

Can you really trust someone like Jake
who thinks Rousseau had a bigger role in the formation of the US than Locke,
to tell the truth?


----------



## saveliberty

Personally, I think the Democrats want a Romney-Obama runoff.  Its a win-win for them.  Romney is Obama Jr.


----------



## Neotrotsky

saveliberty said:


> Personally, I think the Democrats want a Romney-Obama runoff.  Its a win-win for them.  Romney is Obama Jr.



Sure
you just described Jake


----------



## Chris

The Tea Party will die out as most of it's membership is over 60 years old.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Liberals have less kids


----------



## BDBoop

Chris said:


> The Tea Party will die out as most of it's membership is over 60 years old.



Well, that includes the boomers and I think most of them are in pretty good health, so I don't (being a boomer myself) think we should be going with the old "time is on our side" chestnut. They have at least a good 20-40 years to go - therefore, we need a Plan B.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Modern fascism is of the right.  NeoTeaFascist has trouble understanding that, although he supports the principles.

Romney or Perry has a chance against Obama.  No one further to their right has any chance.

Tis what tis.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Modern fascism is of the right.  NeoTeaFascist has trouble understanding that, although he supports the principles.
> 
> Romney or Perry has a chance against Obama.  No one further to their right has any chance.
> 
> Tis what tis.



Fascism means more government control, not less.
The American right wants to reduce government control, the American left wants to increase government control.
It's clear that Communism, Fascism and Socialism are all left wing philosophies.


----------



## ShackledNation

Again with the left-right paradigm. When will you people wake up. You have more government control and less government control. That is the spectrum that matters.


----------



## Synthaholic

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Modern fascism is of the right.  NeoTeaFascist has trouble understanding that, although he supports the principles.
> 
> Romney or Perry has a chance against Obama.  No one further to their right has any chance.
> 
> Tis what tis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism means more government control, not less.
> The American right wants to reduce government control, the American left wants to increase government control.
> It's clear that Communism, *Fascism* and Socialism are all left wing philosophies.
Click to expand...


You are one stupid mofo.


----------



## Richard-H

Just to set the record straight:

The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.

There was one recall election several weeks ago.


----------



## Sarah G

Richard-H said:


> Just to set the record straight:
> 
> The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.
> 
> There was one recall election several weeks ago.



And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..


----------



## ShackledNation

Sarah G said:


> Richard-H said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just to set the record straight:
> 
> The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.
> 
> There was one recall election several weeks ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..
Click to expand...

The Republicans still hold the majority, and two democrats are up for recall. Considering the unions spent millions and they didn't win back the majority...I wouldn't call this a win for them.


----------



## Too Tall

Richard-H said:


> Just to set the record straight:
> 
> The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.
> 
> There was one recall election several weeks ago.



That does look better, since it means the Republicans won 4 of 7.


----------



## Too Tall

Sarah G said:


> Richard-H said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just to set the record straight:
> 
> The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.
> 
> There was one recall election several weeks ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..
Click to expand...


Shillings (D) 55% is considered huge, King's 51%,(D) not so huge.  Every Republican got a higher percentage of the vote than King did, and Cowles' (R) 60% is definitely huge.

According to the Associated Press: 

Cowles (R)  60% Nussbaum (D) 40%

Darling (R)  54%  Pasch 46%

Harsdorf (R)  58%  Moore (D)  42%

Olsen (R)  52%  Clark (D)  48%

King (D)  51%  Hopper (R)  49%

Shilling  (D)  55%  Kapanke (R)  45%


----------



## Sarah G

Too Tall said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Richard-H said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just to set the record straight:
> 
> The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.
> 
> There was one recall election several weeks ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shillings (D) 55% is considered huge, King's 51%,(D) not so huge.  Every Republican got a higher percentage of the vote than King did, and Cowles' (R) 60% is definitely huge.
> 
> According to the Associated Press:
> 
> Cowles (R)  60% Nussbaum (D) 40%
> 
> Darling (R)  54%  Pasch 46%
> 
> Harsdorf (R)  58%  Moore (D)  42%
> 
> Olsen (R)  52%  Clark (D)  48%
> 
> King (D)  51%  Hopper (R)  49%
> 
> Shilling  (D)  55%  Kapanke (R)  45%
Click to expand...


What used to be 19-14 GOP is now 17-16.  It was a big deal, they're not done yet.

This law was a repub railroading, everyone who lives there knows this.  All the Democrats need to do now is get out the vote.


----------



## ShackledNation

Sarah G said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shillings (D) 55% is considered huge, King's 51%,(D) not so huge.  Every Republican got a higher percentage of the vote than King did, and Cowles' (R) 60% is definitely huge.
> 
> According to the Associated Press:
> 
> Cowles (R)  60% Nussbaum (D) 40%
> 
> Darling (R)  54%  Pasch 46%
> 
> Harsdorf (R)  58%  Moore (D)  42%
> 
> Olsen (R)  52%  Clark (D)  48%
> 
> King (D)  51%  Hopper (R)  49%
> 
> Shilling  (D)  55%  Kapanke (R)  45%
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What used to be 19-14 GOP is now 17-16.  It was a big deal, they're not done yet.
> 
> This law was a repub railroading, everyone who lives there knows this.  All the Democrats need to do now is get out the vote.
Click to expand...

And if the two democrats up for recall are recalled, it will be the same as before. It can only get worse for the unions.


----------



## Sarah G

ShackledNation said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shillings (D) 55% is considered huge, King's 51%,(D) not so huge.  Every Republican got a higher percentage of the vote than King did, and Cowles' (R) 60% is definitely huge.
> 
> According to the Associated Press:
> 
> Cowles (R)  60% Nussbaum (D) 40%
> 
> Darling (R)  54%  Pasch 46%
> 
> Harsdorf (R)  58%  Moore (D)  42%
> 
> Olsen (R)  52%  Clark (D)  48%
> 
> King (D)  51%  Hopper (R)  49%
> 
> Shilling  (D)  55%  Kapanke (R)  45%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What used to be 19-14 GOP is now 17-16.  It was a big deal, they're not done yet.
> 
> This law was a repub railroading, everyone who lives there knows this.  All the Democrats need to do now is get out the vote.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And if the two democrats up for recall are recalled, it will be the same as before. It can only get worse for the unions.
Click to expand...


They've already done some damage to the repub senate.  Message sent, will your governor and the Rs left standing learn from it?  By your comments here, I'd sadly no.


----------



## ShackledNation

Sarah G said:


> ShackledNation said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> What used to be 19-14 GOP is now 17-16.  It was a big deal, they're not done yet.
> 
> This law was a repub railroading, everyone who lives there knows this.  All the Democrats need to do now is get out the vote.
> 
> 
> 
> And if the two democrats up for recall are recalled, it will be the same as before. It can only get worse for the unions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They've already done some damage to the repub senate.  Message sent, will your governor and the Rs left standing learn from it?  By your comments here, I'd sadly no.
Click to expand...

Considering how the majority of republicans up for recall kept their seats, and one that was recalled was involved in a marital scandal, I think it is quite clear the unions lost this battle.


----------



## cootydog

I love how liberals set and blame everyone else for their own stupidity. Didn't Obama have a Democratic House, and Senate for two years? the Republicans have had the house a few months and you all set and blame them. News flash why did OBama and a democrat held house and senate not do anything for 2 years??because they did they grew the government so big and got it so broke we the people stepped u and voted tea party in and they alone with the exception of a few GOP rep the tea party held their ground and did what we wanted and I email everyone of them every day along with about 150 of my friends and we are face to face talkin g to people everyday and having more write the tea party and gop making it clear what we want and how great the tea party is doing. Good  bye obama 2012 hello anybody but. oh yea your BS chart any leftest asshole could have drawn up those numbers. They mean shit.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeFakery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Modern fascism is of the right.  NeoTeaFascist has trouble understanding that, although he supports the principles.
> 
> Romney or Perry has a chance against Obama.  No one further to their right has any chance.
> 
> Tis what tis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism means more government control, not less.
> The American right wants to reduce government control, the American left wants to increase government control.
> It's clear that Communism, Fascism and Socialism are all left wing philosophies.
Click to expand...


He still thinks PapaObama Care was a good thing 
He so outside the mainstream of the American voter

Now of course, he will have to cover for himself and call you a fascist
He is simply just a troll,  a bad one, but a troll nonetheless 
what do you expect

 over 20,000 posts and never started a thread
 no real substance there, pure troll behavior, straight up
Only trolls do that kind of thing 


The girl/guy really pushes some radical thinking - 
 -believing that statism does not exist anywhere in the world
 -believing that Rousseau, the father of fascism,  had a greater influence on the founding of this nation than Locke

Which is why he can't defend his radical beliefs and has to call other names
so sad, he is ....


----------



## saveliberty

I find it hard to see how the Tea Party is falling when Bachman has such a good showing in Iowa.  Is plummeting the new winning?  These liberal labels get so confusing.


----------



## thereisnospoon

Richard-H said:


> Just to set the record straight:
> 
> The Dems have won 3 of 7 recall elections in Wisconson, not 2 of 6.
> 
> There was one recall election several weeks ago.


Nobody cares anymore. The desperate attempt by those supporting public worker unions failed.
The outsiders who spent 10's of millions to support the pro union candidates LOST.


----------



## JakeStarkey

NeoTeaFascist wants more government control so that his out of the mainstream can be forced down our throats.  He pretends to be libertarian but is nothing of the sort.


----------



## bitterlyclingin

Report &#8211; CNN, CBS and NY Times polls show CNN, CBS and NY Times anti-Tea Party strategy working

Posted by William A. Jacobson   Sunday, August 14, 2011 at 7:08pm   

There does seem something very circular about CNN, CBS and NY Times polling showing an increase in negative views of the Tea Party, considering that such negative views are driven by biased CNN, CBS and NY Times reporting blaming the Tea Party movement for the S&P downgrade of the U.S. credit rating and a host of other things for which the Tea Party movement was not responsible.

Nonetheless, this self-fulfilling prophecy is news, as reported by The Hill: 

The reign of the Tea Party may be coming to an end in Washington, according to academic political experts who say polls show a backlash against the conservative movement.

Two national polls released this month by CNN and The New York Times in conjunction with CBS News showed the Tea Party&#8217;s unfavorable rating at an all-time high.

Political scientists say the data shows a backlash of independent voters against conservative lawmakers who have taken a hard line against bipartisan compromise in Washington.

See, that&#8217;s how it works.........

» Report &#8211; CNN, CBS and NY Times polls show CNN, CBS and NY Times anti-Tea Party strategy working - Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion


----------



## bitterlyclingin

The NYT has a long history of "push polling", in order to slant the news in a Times desired way, commissioning a public opinion poll with the sample adjusted to produce a desired result, then reporting on that 'result' as news.
The sample in one political opinion poll commissioned by the Times roughly consisted of 48% Democrat, 24 % Republican, and 28% Independents who had voted for Barack Hussein Obama.
89 % per cent favorability rating for the new president. Gee! What a surprise.


----------



## geauxtohell

saveliberty said:


> I find it hard to see how the Tea Party is falling when Bachman has such a good showing in Iowa.  Is plummeting the new winning?  These liberal labels get so confusing.



She bused in more supporters than the other guy.  If the Tea party is seizing control of the GOP, you know Boehner is sweating bullets.  

I don't think that's going to happen.  

Perry is going to jump in to save the GOP establishment.


----------



## geauxtohell

bitterlyclingin said:


> Report  CNN, CBS and NY Times polls show CNN, CBS and NY Times anti-Tea Party strategy working
> 
> Posted by William A. Jacobson   Sunday, August 14, 2011 at 7:08pm
> 
> There does seem something very circular about CNN, CBS and NY Times polling showing an increase in negative views of the Tea Party, considering that such negative views are driven by biased CNN, CBS and NY Times reporting blaming the Tea Party movement for the S&P downgrade of the U.S. credit rating and a host of other things for which the Tea Party movement was not responsible.
> 
> Nonetheless, this self-fulfilling prophecy is news, as reported by The Hill:
> 
> The reign of the Tea Party may be coming to an end in Washington, according to academic political experts who say polls show a backlash against the conservative movement.
> 
> Two national polls released this month by CNN and The New York Times in conjunction with CBS News showed the Tea Partys unfavorable rating at an all-time high.
> 
> Political scientists say the data shows a backlash of independent voters against conservative lawmakers who have taken a hard line against bipartisan compromise in Washington.
> 
> See, thats how it works.........
> 
> » Report  CNN, CBS and NY Times polls show CNN, CBS and NY Times anti-Tea Party strategy working - Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion



Yes.  Blame the media.  That's it.  Rest your pretty head........


----------



## saveliberty

geauxtohell said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find it hard to see how the Tea Party is falling when Bachman has such a good showing in Iowa.  Is plummeting the new winning?  These liberal labels get so confusing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She bused in more supporters than the other guy.  If the Tea party is seizing control of the GOP, you know Boehner is sweating bullets.
> 
> I don't think that's going to happen.
> 
> Perry is going to jump in to save the GOP establishment.
Click to expand...


Got proof she bused in supporters?  Regardless, her organizers were more effective.  If memory serves, that is how we got Obama.  Oh, the GOP establishment is part of the problem.  Good riddence.


----------



## geauxtohell

saveliberty said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find it hard to see how the Tea Party is falling when Bachman has such a good showing in Iowa.  Is plummeting the new winning?  These liberal labels get so confusing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She bused in more supporters than the other guy.  If the Tea party is seizing control of the GOP, you know Boehner is sweating bullets.
> 
> I don't think that's going to happen.
> 
> Perry is going to jump in to save the GOP establishment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Got proof she bused in supporters?  Regardless, her organizers were more effective.  If memory serves, that is how we got Obama.  Oh, the GOP establishment is part of the problem.  Good riddence.
Click to expand...


You know how Ames works, right?  You have to pay $30 a head to vote, and most candidates pay that fee.  As has been noted:



> And let's face it -- the Iowa caucus isn't very important either. In the whole history of the Iowa caucuses, both Republican and Democratic -- often mistakenly referred to as the Iowa primary - since 1972 they've only produced 2 winners, excepting presidents running unopposed for reelection, who went on to become the new president. That's both parties! They were, of course, George W. Bush in 2000 and Barack Obama in 2008. All other winners, Republicans as well as Democrats, either failed to get their party's nomination or lost in the general election.
> 
> Historically, Iowa means practically nothing in presidential politics. Who wins -- who cares? Iowans cast 1,537,123 votes in the 2008 election. This year the Ames Straw Poll had a total of 16,836 voters -- only 4,823 of whom bothered to check off Michelle Bachmann's name. Big win, right? Huge! Remember past would-be Republicans Bob Barr and Wayne Root? Never heard of them? They got twice as many votes in that 2008 general election as Ms. Bachmann rolled up in her "smashing victory" in Ames. Really now, ask yourself -- why is Iowa supposedly vital to the choice of the next President of the United States? Says who?



Richard Greener: Michelle Bachmann or the Media: Who Is Crazier?

It was money well spent by Bachman, she'll get it back in donations.  However, a large part of "winning" Ames is spending your own money in it.


----------



## saveliberty

So by your view, winning is meaningless and predicts failure.


----------



## geauxtohell

saveliberty said:


> So by your view, winning is meaningless and predicts failure.



No.  It just doesn't predict success.  It's good for scuttling candidates but less useful in propelling them.  High sensitivity and low specificity.  

Don't forget Pat Robertson won Ames, but so did W.  Hell, Romney won the last one.  He didn't even participate in this one.  Obviously, he knows the deal.  

Not so ironically, I think Bachmann will fade like Romney did.  I think Perry will end up winning the shooting match.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Bachmann winning in Iowa does not mean anything more than the far righties had a good time there.

Those polls that the TeaPots don't like are fairly accurate, as the Tea Party drops as most of America realizes just how far out of the mainstream are the TeaPots.


----------



## oreo

Synthaholic said:


> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the teabaggers, the more they don't like them.



*So then you're stating that the majority of  Americans are against curbing Federal Government spending--and cutting the deficit?*

Blaming the Tea Party for the S & P downgrade is like blaming the Betty Ford Foundation for alcoholism--LOL

For 2-1/2 years the tea party movement has been out there warning of Federal Government spending and deficits. 

Obama ignored his own congressional budget office warning over a year ago--that his spending was unsustainable--and Moody's has been threatening a down grade for the last 11 months--and long before this congress was elected.  *Furthermore--if this POLL was actually correct--why did Barack Obama's Gallop approval rating CRASH below 40 and has now hit a new LOW of 39%?  *

If Americans actually believed that the S & P Downgrade was the fault of the  Tea Party movement in this country--Obama's approval rating would be UP not DOWN--LOL

There are only 3 people to blame for this downgrade--and it's Obama--Reid and Pelosi--whom have ignored all prior warnings.


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> Bachmann winning in Iowa does not mean anything more than the far righties had a good time there.
> 
> Those polls that the TeaPots don't like are fairly accurate, as the Tea Party drops as most of America realizes just how far out of the mainstream are the TeaPots.



I disagree.  I think Iowa shows the Tea Party is alive and well.  It also shows the polls were vastly skewed by the media which courted and promoted the opinion you hold.


----------



## Mustang

JakeStarkey said:


> Bachmann winning in Iowa does not mean anything more than the far righties had a good time there.
> 
> Those polls that the TeaPots don't like are fairly accurate, as the Tea Party drops as most of America realizes just how far out of the mainstream are the TeaPots.


 
I think I have to offer a SLIGHT correction.  Extremism IS becoming mainstream in the GOP.  Some people might call it by another name.  Whatever word one chooses to use as a discriptive name regarding the GOP these days, it certainly does not appear to be reality-based in nature.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The GOP mainstream leadership is doing its darndest to (1) take good Tea Party ideas where they have them, and (2) discourage extremism wherever.  Doing (2) is not easy, because the Tea Folks generate enough votes in some marginal districts to swing the election.

To those who are suggesting the Tea Party is mainstream, you are flatly out of touch with reality.


----------



## Synthaholic

Sarah G said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shillings (D) 55% is considered huge, King's 51%,(D) not so huge.  Every Republican got a higher percentage of the vote than King did, and Cowles' (R) 60% is definitely huge.
> 
> According to the Associated Press:
> 
> Cowles (R)  60% Nussbaum (D) 40%
> 
> Darling (R)  54%  Pasch 46%
> 
> Harsdorf (R)  58%  Moore (D)  42%
> 
> Olsen (R)  52%  Clark (D)  48%
> 
> King (D)  51%  Hopper (R)  49%
> 
> Shilling  (D)  55%  Kapanke (R)  45%
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What used to be 19-14 GOP is now 17-16.  It was a big deal, they're not done yet.
> 
> This law was a repub railroading, everyone who lives there knows this.  All the Democrats need to do now is get out the vote.
Click to expand...

Also, one of those remaining Republicans frequently votes with the Democrats.

I guess he/she is a RINO.  Or just has at least half a brain.


----------



## Synthaholic

cootydog said:


> I love how liberals set and blame everyone else for their own stupidity. Didn't Obama have a Democratic House, and Senate for two years? the Republicans have had the house a few months and you all set and blame them. News flash why did OBama and a democrat held house and senate not do anything for 2 years??because they did they grew the government so big and got it so broke we the people stepped u and voted tea party in and they alone with the exception of a few GOP rep the tea party held their ground and did what we wanted and I email everyone of them every day along with about 150 of my friends and we are face to face talkin g to people everyday and having more write the tea party and gop making it clear what we want and how great the tea party is doing. Good  bye obama 2012 hello anybody but. oh yea your BS chart any leftest asshole could have drawn up those numbers. They mean shit.


Filibusters.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Mustang said:


> I think I have to offer a SLIGHT correction.  Extremism IS becoming mainstream in the GOP.



LOL

Your Messiah® is openly fascist, literally merging corporations and the federal government, and you call the GOP "extremist?"


----------



## saveliberty

The Tea Party doesn't seem to have a problem with women candidates.  It will be interesting to see how that plays out.


----------



## Mustang

Uncensored2008 said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have to offer a SLIGHT correction. Extremism IS becoming mainstream in the GOP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Your Messiah® is openly fascist, literally merging corporations and the federal government, and you call the GOP "extremist?"
Click to expand...

 
How appropriate that you used the cukoo smily.

Obama has been "labelled" everything from a socialist to a communist to a fascist to a foreign born person who's not really American. It reminds me of the story about the boy who cried wolf or a Kurt Vonnegut novel where satire and common sense are fused (or intentionally confused) with one another.

Do conservative ever stop to listen to what they say? I ask for this reason. If you guys ever listened to the content of what you say, you would realize that it doesn't sound rational, and that's even more true when the myriad claims of conservatives are reviewed collectively.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Uncensored2008 said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have to offer a SLIGHT correction.  Extremism IS becoming mainstream in the GOP.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL   Your Messiah® is openly fascist, literally merging corporations and the federal government, and you call the GOP "extremist?"
Click to expand...


Obama is the president of the U.S., an American born citizen, not a fascist though he does support some bad neo-con positions.  You are a far right extremist fascist, UncensoredFascist, who wishes to make mainstream your unAmerican lamestream ideas.  Not going to happen.


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have to offer a SLIGHT correction.  Extremism IS becoming mainstream in the GOP.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL   Your Messiah® is openly fascist, literally merging corporations and the federal government, and you call the GOP "extremist?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama is the president of the U.S., an American born citizen, not a fascist though he does support some bad neo-con positions.  You are a far right extremist fascist, UncensoredFascist, who wishes to make mainstream your unAmerican lamestream ideas.  Not going to happen.
Click to expand...


Whatcha going to do?  Repeal free speech?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Of course not, and neither are you.  littledebfascist would do that in a heartbeat if she could get away with it.  Remember, you are a patriot, she is not.


----------



## saveliberty

Not 100% sure why, but Obama does seem to have prompted more extreme views by both sides.  He does show signs of a compromise mentality at times, but then his Chicago style politics streak pops out and we get what we have.  A fiscally conservative, but generally moderate person would most likely serve us best.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Michelle, Sarah, and Rick are not moderate in any sense of the word, though Rick, since he is not a true believer but instead a user, is more to their left on political issues.  He is hard core on economics and social values but can compromise when he has to do so.  I think Romney would be even better, but I am beginning to wonder just how viable he is going to be in this campaign season.  New Hampshire and South Caroline will be the defining moments just how far right the GOP as a group will go.  What is interesting is that the GOP is becoming what the Dems are: a coalition of competing interests and no longer a party.


----------



## oreo

saveliberty said:


> Not 100% sure why, but Obama does seem to have prompted more extreme views by both sides.  He does show signs of a compromise mentality at times, but then his Chicago style politics streak pops out and we get what we have.  A fiscally conservative, but generally moderate person would most likely serve us best.



:

Clinton spent 432 million a day.
G.W. Bush spent 1.6 BILLION dollars a day.
Obama is spending 4.3 BILLION dollars a day.

Right now Barack Obama in his almost 3 years has borrowed and spent more than G.W. Bush did in 8 years.--and Bush spent too much!/SIZE]


----------



## oreo

saveliberty said:


> Not 100% sure why, but Obama does seem to have prompted more extreme views by both sides.  He does show signs of a compromise mentality at times, but then his Chicago style politics streak pops out and we get what we have.  A fiscally conservative, but generally moderate person would most likely serve us best.




Clinton spent 432 million a day.
G.W. Bush spent 1.6 BILLION dollars a day.
Obama is spending 4.3 BILLION dollars a day.

Right now Barack Obama in his almost 3 years has borrowed and spent more than G.W. Bush did in 8 years & Bush spent too much.

View attachment 14721


----------



## oreo

JakeStarkey said:


> Michelle, Sarah, and Rick are not moderate in any sense of the word, though Rick, since he is not a true believer but instead a user, is more to their left on political issues.  He is hard core on economics and social values but can compromise when he has to do so.  I think Romney would be even better, but I am beginning to wonder just how viable he is going to be in this campaign season.  New Hampshire and South Caroline will be the defining moments just how far right the GOP as a group will go.  What is interesting is that the GOP is becoming what the Dems are: a coalition of competing interests and no longer a party.



Rick Santorum is a total nightmare on social issues.  And he is much worse than Palin or Michelle Bachmann ever thought of being.  Ever seen that MEAN--UGLY look he gets on his face when he is talking about gays or abortion?

As far as his knowledge--he was only in the senate for 1 term before he got booted.  There is no way I would vote for this guy--he still believes as President--he could walk all over states rights--and I am not going to vote for that.

BTW--I am a fiscal conservative--not necessarily a social conservative--even though I am pro-life I understand why a woman would want to get an abortion if she was raped---incest -as does Sarah Palin and Michell Bachmann--Rick Santorum still hasn't figured that one out yet.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Mustang said:


> How appropriate that you used the cukoo smily.



Yes, because you're fucking nuts. You follow a fascist yet call others "extreme."

Just amazing.



> Obama has been "labelled" everything from a socialist to a communist to a facsist to a foreign born person who's not really American.



Who cares?

The fact is, as I have shown YOU dozens of times, Obama is a fascist. Beyond the merger of General Motors and General Electric, there is Obama Care, where corporation and federal government become one entity. We have General Electric's Immelt as "Job Czar." Is it his function as part of the federal government that he moves 50,000 jobs to China? Or is it his position as corporate fat cat?

Well, you can't tell - the line between corporate and federal hasn't been blurred, it's been erased. 

And that, whether you have the brains to grasp it, is fascism. That you are a partisan hack will not alter it, it's fascism.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> Obama is the president of the U.S., an American born citizen, not a fascist though he does support some bad neo-con positions.  You are a far right extremist fascist, UncensoredFascist, who wishes to make mainstream your unAmerican lamestream ideas.  Not going to happen.



Obama is a fascist - that is a matter of fact.

You are a partisan hack, which is also irrefutable fact.


----------



## BoycottTheday

Whoever is coming up with the liberals talking points is batting Zero imho.

Got a great idea on how Obama can save some dosh in the budget

Fire every liberal hack he hired, because they SUCK.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Uncensored2008 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is the president of the U.S., an American born citizen, not a fascist though he does support some bad neo-con positions.  You are a far right extremist fascist, UncensoredFascist, who wishes to make mainstream your unAmerican lamestream ideas.  Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a fascist - that is a matter of fact.
> 
> You are a partisan hack, which is also irrefutable fact.
Click to expand...


You are so _neener neener_, UncensoredFascist.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> You are so _neener neener_, UncensoredFascist.



The sad part is that of all your posts, that was the highest quality you've achieved.


----------



## Mustang

Uncensored2008 said:


> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> How appropriate that you used the cukoo smily.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, because you're fucking nuts. You follow a fascist yet call others "extreme."
> 
> Just amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama has been "labelled" everything from a socialist to a communist to a facsist to a foreign born person who's not really American.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who cares?
> 
> The fact is, as I have shown YOU dozens of times, Obama is a fascist. Beyond the merger of General Motors and General Electric, there is Obama Care, where corporation and federal government become one entity. We have General Electric's Immelt as "Job Czar." Is it his function as part of the federal government that he moves 50,000 jobs to China? Or is it his position as corporate fat cat?
> 
> Well, you can't tell - the line between corporate and federal hasn't been blurred, it's been erased.
> 
> And that, whether you have the brains to grasp it, is fascism. That you are a partisan hack will not alter it, it's fascism.
Click to expand...

 
Negative.  My feet are on the ground, and my head is not in the clouds.
But I think you're on your knees with your head in the sand.

General Motors was not taken over by gov't.  If that ever happens in some future time, that's what's known as nationalization.  That's where the gov't essentially owns and runs a business.  No, GM got a gov't loan to get them over the hump of their financial collapse in 2008.  That loan came with some caveats.  I consider that to be pretty darn smart since it was taxpayers' money and giving that money to GM without strings attached would have been just plain stupid.

As far as moving jobs overseas (China, Mexico, India, Guatemala, Bangladesh, etc), THAT has been going on since the 1990s.

What is it with conservatives these days?  I ask in regards to lots of things, but let's talk about Obamacare.  I keep hearing conservatives say that it's a gov't takeover of healthcare or socialized medicine.  Really?

Is there a public option? No.

Are there gov't hospitals? No.
Are there gov't doctors? No.

However, the last two questions could be answered YES if you're talking about the VA, which I understand Republicans support, right?

THAT is socialized medicine!

Gov't and the private sector have always worked closely together.  Now, if you are REALLY upset at corporate influence on gov't, then perhaps what you and other conservatives should be worried about is corporate campaign contributions to BOTH political parties and candidates of both parties.  Although that's been going on for a LONG time, the SC has made the problem worse in their 5-4 ruling in Jan of last year on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Mustang said:


> Negative.  My feet are on the ground, and my head is not in the clouds.



You are a hyperpartisan who will say anything to promote your shameful party.



> General Motors was not taken over by gov't.



Are you on drugs?

If you don't deal with facts, communication is impossible.

{President Obama defended his decision to take a majority stake in GM, saying it was unavoidable and temporary. "We are acting as reluctant shareholders," he said in a televised address.}

GM Collapses Into Government's Arms - WSJ.com

Regardless of your drug induced delusions, the government did in fact take over GM. Obama personally fired the head of GM - as Fuhrer, he could do so.

{The Obama administration asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to step down and he agreed, a White House official said.}

GM CEO resigns at Obama's behest - Mike Allen and Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com



> As far as moving jobs overseas (China, Mexico, India, Guatemala, Bangladesh, etc), THAT has been going on since the 1990s.



Irrelevant. The point is that Immel, the job Czar AND CEO of General Electric, recipient of billions of tax dollars, moved the jobs.

Is Immelt part of a corporation or part of the federal government?

Well, he's both - because they are one and the same.


----------



## ShackledNation

Mustang said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> How appropriate that you used the cukoo smily.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, because you're fucking nuts. You follow a fascist yet call others "extreme."
> 
> Just amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama has been "labelled" everything from a socialist to a communist to a facsist to a foreign born person who's not really American.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who cares?
> 
> The fact is, as I have shown YOU dozens of times, Obama is a fascist. Beyond the merger of General Motors and General Electric, there is Obama Care, where corporation and federal government become one entity. We have General Electric's Immelt as "Job Czar." Is it his function as part of the federal government that he moves 50,000 jobs to China? Or is it his position as corporate fat cat?
> 
> Well, you can't tell - the line between corporate and federal hasn't been blurred, it's been erased.
> 
> And that, whether you have the brains to grasp it, is fascism. That you are a partisan hack will not alter it, it's fascism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Negative.  My feet are on the ground, and my head is not in the clouds.
> But I think you're on your knees with your head in the sand.
> 
> General Motors was not taken over by gov't.  If that ever happens in some future time, that's what's known as nationalization.  That's where the gov't essentially owns and runs a business.  No, GM got a gov't loan to get them over the hump of their financial collapse in 2008.  That loan came with some caveats.  I consider that to be pretty darn smart since it was taxpayers' money and giving that money to GM without strings attached would have been just plain stupid.
> 
> As far as moving jobs overseas (China, Mexico, India, Guatemala, Bangladesh, etc), THAT has been going on since the 1990s.
> 
> What is it with conservatives these days?  I ask in regards to lots of things, but let's talk about Obamacare.  I keep hearing conservatives say that it's a gov't takeover of healthcare or socialized medicine.  Really?
> 
> Is there a public option? No.
> 
> Are there gov't hospitals? No.
> Are there gov't doctors? No.
> 
> However, the last two questions could be answered YES if you're talking about the VA, which I understand Republicans support, right?
> 
> THAT is socialized medicine!
> 
> Gov't and the private sector have always worked closely together.  Now, if you are REALLY upset at corporate influence on gov't, then perhaps what you and other conservatives should be worried about is corporate campaign contributions to BOTH political parties and candidates of both parties.  Although that's been going on for a LONG time, the SC has made the problem worse in their 5-4 ruling in Jan of last year on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between government running something entirely and corporatism/fascism. Current government policies are not socialist, they are corporatist. There is subsidization of corporations, regulation of them, and government heavily influences them. You know you have a corporatist system when big businesses spend so much money on lobbyists. Obama, however, is not unique in his corporatist policies. Bush was hardly better. Obama pretty much has continued for the most part the failed policies of Bush and then put some of them on steroids.


----------



## saveliberty

GM sure was taken over by the government.  Personally cost me sales too.


----------



## oreo

saveliberty said:


> GM sure was taken over by the government.  Personally cost me sales too.



American citizens owned 40% of General Motors--that is a fact--due to the Federal Government going in and taking over.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Uncensored2008 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are so _neener neener_, UncensoredFascist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The sad part is that of all your posts, that was the highest quality you've achieved.
Click to expand...


You have just described what you do, Uncensored.

You can't debate on the points, you name call, you get called out, then you whine.


----------



## cootydog

the more the stupid ass leftest hate on the Tea Party the more strong they become. The more we know you, the left, hate them, the more we know they are what we want. So keep it up...pointing fingers and calling names keep it up and watch the Tea Party fix the leftest problem in this country


----------



## peach174

There is more support for the tea party than congress.
Tea party 33%
Congress 13%


----------



## JakeStarkey

peach174 said:


> There is more support for the tea party than congress.
> Tea party 33%
> Congress 13%



There is more support for Obama than the Tea Party.

What these stats are showing is that we Americans are all unhappy.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> There is more support for Obama than the Tea Party.



Too bad for you that your little tin god isn't running against someone named "Tea Party."


----------



## JakeStarkey

UncensoredFascist, Obama is more popular than my GOP at the moment.  That's the problem.  You have character issues that prevent you from seeing the much larger picture.


----------



## Too Tall

Sarah G said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the wins were huge.  The pasty face Gov must be getting nervous at this point..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shillings (D) 55% is considered huge, King's 51%,(D) not so huge.  Every Republican got a higher percentage of the vote than King did, and Cowles' (R) 60% is definitely huge.
> 
> According to the Associated Press:
> 
> Cowles (R)  60% Nussbaum (D) 40%
> 
> Darling (R)  54%  Pasch 46%
> 
> Harsdorf (R)  58%  Moore (D)  42%
> 
> Olsen (R)  52%  Clark (D)  48%
> 
> King (D)  51%  Hopper (R)  49%
> 
> Shilling  (D)  55%  Kapanke (R)  45%
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What used to be 19-14 GOP is now 17-16.  It was a big deal, they're not done yet.
> 
> This law was a repub railroading, everyone who lives there knows this.  All the Democrats need to do now is get out the vote.
Click to expand...


Not everyone is.  4 out of 6 Republicans were voted FOR.  And, we shall see if the two Democrats up for recall keep their seats tomorrow.


----------



## Too Tall

Mustang said:


> Full-Auto said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mustang said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing. Every once in a while, if I listen to conservative talk radio, I hear some host making a mountain out of something that's not even high enough to be considered a mole hill. I could hear it at least twenty times a day if I chose to listen long enough.
> 
> Now, when the S&P report is delivered, and it's abundantly clear what S&P is saying (even though they do not mention any particular person or group by name), you're going to claim that not mentioning a particular group by name means that the report couldn't possibly be pointing to the how that one group was willing to take America right to the edge of default, regardless of the consequences? I ask that question especially since the report mentions the brinksmanship that was going on, and everyone knows from which side of the political spectrum that brinksmanship was originating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IF THE REPUBS HAD NOT TAKEN THE HOUSE THE DOWNGRADE WOULD HAVE HAPPENED MONTHS AGO. Part of the concern was not being able to address the issues we face, If not for the house the issues would not have been faced at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's merely conjecture.  In FACT, if the Republicans hadn't taken controll, it's quite likely that the Bush tax cuts (responsible for something like 60% of the debt) for the wealthiest Americans would have been gradually phased out, thereby lowering America's debt to GDP ratio and preventing the S&P downgrade.
Click to expand...


Perhaps you will tell me on what date the Bush tax cuts were renewed for two years.  I do know that the Republicans did not take control of the House until January, 2011.


----------



## Too Tall

Synthaholic said:


> Bigfoot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main stream media is capitalist free market to the bone.
> 
> The corporate execs realize the far right social values and fascist extremists are rapidly shrinking in numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is absolutely inaccurate. *The American Left is shrinking in numbers* and NBC and MSNBC's dismal ratings is just one of the indicators. Obama himself has also very likely done irreparable harm to the progressives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which orifice did you pull this out of?
> 
> And NBC/MSNBC's ratings are just fine.
Click to expand...


MSNBC's are half or less than Fox News and run close to CNN.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/tag/msnbc-ratings/


----------



## Too Tall

JakeStarkey said:


> Uncensored is busily trying to hide the rest of the polling from Real Clear Politics behind the curtain.
> 
> "Don't look behind the curtain," goes Wizard Uncensored.
> 
> RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls



I did find this at your favorite political site.



> There it was: 39 percent. Floor broke. Threshold crossed. The close of Barack Obamas awful week. One more awful August. On Sunday, for the first time in his presidency, Obamas public approval rating dipped below 40 percent in the Gallup Poll.



RealClearPolitics - At 39 Percent, Obama&#039;s Reminded the Worst Could Lie Ahead


----------



## JakeStarkey

Too Tall said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored is busily trying to hide the rest of the polling from Real Clear Politics behind the curtain.
> 
> "Don't look behind the curtain," goes Wizard Uncensored.
> 
> RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did find this at your favorite political site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There it was: 39 percent. Floor broke. Threshold crossed. The close of Barack Obama&#8217;s awful week. One more awful August. On Sunday, for the first time in his presidency, Obama&#8217;s public approval rating dipped below 40 percent in the Gallup Poll.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> RealClearPolitics - At 39 Percent, Obama's Reminded the Worst Could Lie Ahead
Click to expand...


That is important, Too Tall, for sure, and it is not good for Obama.  What is worse for the far right though, is that Obama's score is much better than the Tea Party's.  Or that he bounced back to 41% the next day.


----------



## JMadison

Bass v 2.0 said:


> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?


 
Spending cuts.


----------



## JakeStarkey

JMadison said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spending cuts.
Click to expand...


About 7% of what they could have accomplished in cuts while scaring the crap out of America?  They are losing popularity more quickly than Obama: amazing.


----------



## thereisnospoon

JakeStarkey said:


> JMadison said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've been plummeting for a while now, they have an overinflated sense of themselves, what have they really accomplished?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spending cuts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About 7% of what they could have accomplished in cuts while scaring the crap out of America?  They are losing popularity more quickly than Obama: amazing.
Click to expand...

Sez you and all the other libs with their wishful thinking.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored is busily trying to hide the rest of the polling from Real Clear Politics behind the curtain.
> 
> "Don't look behind the curtain," goes Wizard Uncensored.
> 
> RealClearPolitics - Opinion, News, Analysis, Videos and Polls
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did find this at your favorite political site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There it was: 39 percent. Floor broke. Threshold crossed. The close of Barack Obamas awful week. One more awful August. On Sunday, for the first time in his presidency, Obamas public approval rating dipped below 40 percent in the Gallup Poll.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> RealClearPolitics - At 39 Percent, Obama's Reminded the Worst Could Lie Ahead
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is important, Too Tall, for sure, and it is not good for Obama.  What is worse for the far right though, is that Obama's score is much better than the Tea Party's.  Or that he bounced back to 41% the next day.
Click to expand...


The Tea Party isn't running for President.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The Tea Party is certainly supporting candidates for president, and those candidates are not doing as well as Obama.  RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination  and RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - President Obama vs. Republican Candidate


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> The Tea Party is certainly supporting candidates for president, and those candidates are not doing as well as Obama.  RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination  and RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - President Obama vs. Republican Candidate



1.3% + 9.1% = buh bye Obama.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> The Tea Party is certainly supporting candidates for president, and those candidates are not doing as well as Obama.



When your Messiah® is tossed out, come Jan 20, 2013 - will you commit suicide?

I'm just curious.


----------



## saveliberty

The Tea Party is not a group of mindless zombies.  In fact, a lot of them were called Independents last presidential cycle.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.

The facts are (1) Obama is not in a warm and happy place, (2) the Tea Party is in a worse place, which means (3) the GOP candidate will have to draw from the centrists and independents, only a few of which are Tea Party minded.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.
> 
> The facts are (1) Obama is not in a warm and happy place, (2) the Tea Party is in a worse place, which means (3) the GOP candidate will have to draw from the centrists and independents, only a few of which are Tea Party minded.



1.3% GDP growth and 9.1% unemployment means Obama will soon be the first one term African-American President.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.
> 
> The facts are (1) Obama is not in a warm and happy place, (2) the Tea Party is in a worse place, which means (3) the GOP candidate will have to draw from the centrists and independents, only a few of which are Tea Party minded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.3% GDP growth and 9.1% unemployment means Obama will soon be the first one term African-American President.
Click to expand...


That may be true, but even then only Romney or possibly Perry can dump him.  If the GOP trots up Sarah, Michelle, Ron, or Newt, Obama will win hands down regardless of the economy.  That is how much the rest of America dislikes the Tea Party.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.



And you're guilty of being a mindless troll.

Still, you didn't answer my question: When Obama is voted out of office, will you kill yourself in protest? Or just because you don't want to live in a world where he isn't the ruler?


----------



## saveliberty

JakeStarkey said:


> Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.
> 
> The facts are (1) Obama is not in a warm and happy place, (2) the Tea Party is in a worse place, which means (3) the GOP candidate will have to draw from the centrists and independents, only a few of which are Tea Party minded.



Sorry Jake, I'll try to be more unreasonable tomorrow.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.
> 
> The facts are (1) Obama is not in a warm and happy place, (2) the Tea Party is in a worse place, which means (3) the GOP candidate will have to draw from the centrists and independents, only a few of which are Tea Party minded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.3% GDP growth and 9.1% unemployment means Obama will soon be the first one term African-American President.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That may be true, but even then only Romney or possibly Perry can dump him.  If the GOP trots up Sarah, Michelle, Ron, or Newt, Obama will win hands down regardless of the economy.  That is how much the rest of America dislikes the Tea Party.
Click to expand...


Hate to break it to you, but if unemployment is above 9%, your boyfriend will lose no matter who is on the Republican ticket.


----------



## Synthaholic

saveliberty said:


> The Tea Party is not a group of mindless zombies.  In fact, a lot of them were called Independents last presidential cycle.


No, they were called the extreme right fringe.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Synthaholic said:


> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the teabaggers, the more they don't like them.



People should already be  familiar with the tea party agenda they should have learned that when they were in school taking American 18th centur  history.


----------



## Synthaholic

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the teabaggers, the more they don't like them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People should already be  familiar with the tea party agenda they should have learned that when they were in school taking American 18th centur  history.
Click to expand...

Please go be stupid in some other thread.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Synthaholic said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, the more that people become familiar with the teabaggers, the more they don't like them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People should already be  familiar with the tea party agenda they should have learned that when they were in school taking American 18th centur  history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please go be stupid in some other thread.
Click to expand...


No you have the stupid corner all to yourself.. You hate the Constitution don't you? You hate anyone that will actually defend it.


----------



## oreo

toxicmedia said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
Click to expand...


Well--today's Gallop poll shows what Americans think of Barack Obama--and you will note that he has crashed through another support level on the economy. 

 I have stated this several times--and will say it again.  *When politicians attack average--law abiding--tax paying citizens of this country--it leaves a foul taste in all Americans mouths regardless of what your political ideology is.*

OBAMA today is PAYING  a very HEAVY Price for blaming the S & P downgrade on  the Tea Party members of this nation--and this poll proves it!

Obama crashes through to new low on economy--*ONLY 26% approve*--

New Low of 26% Approve of Obama on the Economy

The sharks are gathering.



Bye--Bye--Barack Obama


----------



## Synthaholic

oreo said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> New CNN poll, just out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/09/poll.aug9.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Believe it or not...I actualy found it interesting that 18% of the population in this study either doesn't care about, or hasen't heard of the Tea Party.
> 
> At any rate...this poll just reinforces how the Republicans lost the most valuable tool in their arsenal in the November 2010 election...which was blamelessness. Now that they run the house...they're reaping the rewards of being in charge to a degee. It should be becoming obvious that last November's election results were not a sweeping, unheard of, historic, unbelieveable, never before seen mandate of conservatism...but just a sweeping mandate of throwing out the people in charge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well--today's Gallop poll shows what Americans think of Barack Obama--and you will note that he has crashed through another support level on the economy.
Click to expand...



He is suffering from not being aggressive enough in fighting against these legislative terrorists who put Party above Country.




> I have stated this several times--and will say it again.  *When politicians attack average--law abiding--tax paying citizens of this country--it leaves a foul taste in all Americans mouths regardless of what your political ideology is.*
> 
> OBAMA today is PAYING  a very HEAVY Price for blaming the S & P downgrade on  the Tea Party members of this nation--and this poll proves it!





All of that is bullshit.


----------



## cootydog

Here are a few words from one of America's first Tea Party members...A true American Patriot Thomas Jefferson:

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.


----------



## JakeStarkey

saveliberty said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Todd is guilty of fuzzy math, Uncensored is guilty of fuzzy mind, and saveliberty has a good point.
> 
> The facts are (1) Obama is not in a warm and happy place, (2) the Tea Party is in a worse place, which means (3) the GOP candidate will have to draw from the centrists and independents, only a few of which are Tea Party minded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Jake, I'll try to be more unreasonable tomorrow.
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.3% GDP growth and 9.1% unemployment means Obama will soon be the first one term African-American President.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That may be true, but even then only Romney or possibly Perry can dump him.  If the GOP trots up Sarah, Michelle, Ron, or Newt, Obama will win hands down regardless of the economy.  That is how much the rest of America dislikes the Tea Party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hate to break it to you, but if unemployment is above 9%, your boyfriend will lose no matter who is on the Republican ticket.
Click to expand...


You have just demonstrated, like Uncensored and bigreb do all the time, your hatred of Obama blocks your thinking process and objectivity.  You are doing exactly what all the President's men and women want you to do.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Synthaholic said:


> No, they were called the extreme right fringe.



Where in your mind, "moderates" would be Barack Obama, Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong Il?


----------



## JakeStarkey




----------



## Uncensored2008

Synthaholic said:


> Please go be stupid in some other thread.



Your presence already exceeds the stupidity quota for this thread, huh?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> That may be true, but even then only Romney or possibly Perry can dump him.  If the GOP trots up Sarah, Michelle, Ron, or Newt, Obama will win hands down regardless of the economy.  That is how much the rest of America dislikes the Tea Party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hate to break it to you, but if unemployment is above 9%, your boyfriend will lose no matter who is on the Republican ticket.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have just demonstrated, like Uncensored and bigreb do all the time, your hatred of Obama blocks your thinking process and objectivity.  You are doing exactly what all the President's men and women want you to do.
Click to expand...


Hatred? Where?

I'm doing what exactly?


----------



## JakeStarkey




----------



## saveliberty

Anyone care to dispute the economy will be the number one issue for the presidential election?

I think that is a fair assessment.  Given that then, how individual candidates express their solutions would seem to be the best indicator of a victor.  Obama will be judged by his actual results.  Polls show that is an abysmal number.  So, who else steps up with a plan that makes sense to the average voter?

I'm looking for someone transparent on the issue, using common sense and strong enough to actually stop pork barrel and other unnecessary spending.  Spending cuts followed by dedicated tax increase to pay down the debt makes sense to me.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


>



Hate to break it to you, but if unemployment is above 9%, your boyfriend will lose no matter who is on the Republican ticket.


----------



## Divine Wind

saveliberty said:


> Anyone care to dispute the economy will be the number one issue for the presidential election?
> 
> I think that is a fair assessment.  Given that then, how individual candidates express their solutions would seem to be the best indicator of a victor.  Obama will be judged by his actual results.  Polls show that is an abysmal number.  So, who else steps up with a plan that makes sense to the average voter?



Agreed on all points.  The problem, of course, is running a Republican candidate who appeals to the majority of voters with a clear plan for leading us out of our problems.  The current batch in Congress didn't win any points with "We, the People" by sticking to their hard line party dogma :  No new taxes vs. Don't touch my entitlements.  Most of the public understands it will be a combination of both but they want to see some real movement on the problem before sacrificing their Medicare and SS benefits.

The Tea Party is a great example of how a relatively few voters can be motivated enough to sway elections and the direction of Congress.  That's the good news.  The bad news is they've painted themselves into a bit of an extremist corner in the eyes of the public.  Hence their fall from grace in the popularity polls.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/opinion/crashing-the-tea-party.html


> GIVEN how much sway the Tea Party has among Republicans in Congress and those seeking the Republican presidential nomination, one might think the Tea Party is redefining mainstream American politics....Polls show that disapproval of the Tea Party is climbing. In April 2010, a New York Times/CBS News survey found that 18 percent of Americans had an unfavorable opinion of it, 21 percent had a favorable opinion and 46 percent had not heard enough. Now, 14 months later, Tea Party supporters have slipped to 20 percent, while their opponents have more than doubled, to 40 percent.
> 
> Of course, politicians of all stripes are not faring well among the public these days. But in data we have recently collected, the Tea Party ranks lower than any of the 23 other groups we asked about  lower than both Republicans and Democrats. It is even less popular than much maligned groups like atheists and Muslims.


----------



## saveliberty

I probably wouldn't use the NYT to make my point about a poll(s) the NYT has an opinon on.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> You have just demonstrated, like Uncensored and bigreb do all the time, your hatred of Obama blocks your thinking process and objectivity.  You are doing exactly what all the President's men and women want you to do.



What is demonstrated is that your worship of Obama destroys and semblance of rationality with you. You are a sycophant,


----------



## Divine Wind

saveliberty said:


> I probably wouldn't use the NYT to make my point about a poll(s) the NYT has an opinon on.



Because they're part of the Zionist Socialist Elite conspiracy? 

Feel free to post a current poll you're more comfortable with making a point.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Uncensored2008 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have just demonstrated, like Uncensored and bigreb do all the time, your hatred of Obama blocks your thinking process and objectivity.  You are doing exactly what all the President's men and women want you to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is demonstrated is that your worship of Obama destroys and semblance of rationality with you. You are a sycophant,
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hate to break it to you, but if unemployment is above 9%, your boyfriend will lose no matter who is on the Republican ticket.
Click to expand...


If you believe that, then you are a fool.


----------



## BDBoop

The 'fool' bit was established long ago.


----------



## saveliberty

Divine.Wind said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> I probably wouldn't use the NYT to make my point about a poll(s) the NYT has an opinon on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they're part of the Zionist Socialist Elite conspiracy?
> 
> Feel free to post a current poll you're more comfortable with making a point.
Click to expand...


No, because it is not what unbiased reporting does.  Wow, you have some serious issues going on there.  I think it was fairly well documented that the poll did not disclose party affiliation, which is very unusual for a poll of this nature.  Try to keep your conspiracies to yourself or at least in the appropriate section.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Does this statement remind you of anyone?

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" or "Message Board Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums.  A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion.  Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

A classic CureZone troll is trying to make us believe that he is a genuine skeptic with no hidden agenda.  He is divisive and argumentative with need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth",  flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people or provoking people to insult him.  Troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.


----------



## JakeStarkey

A successful troll is all of those things.  But bigreb and Uncensored and their buddies are very poor trolls, which lends to the merriment around here.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Divine.Wind said:


> The Tea Party is a great example of how a relatively few voters can be motivated enough to sway elections and the direction of Congress.  That's the good news.  The bad news is they've painted themselves into a bit of an extremist corner in the eyes of the public.  Hence their fall from grace in the popularity polls.




The "fall from grace" is mostly party media orchestrated nonsense. Of course the party media does shape attitudes. The party is creating reality with these "stories" of the alienation of the TEA Party. Though the stories are initially a fabrication, once they are run several dozen times a day for a few months, they are accepted as reality. The DNC propaganda corps of the NY Times and the alphabet networks have been pumping this for all it's worth in their campaign to salvage Obama. 

Will it work? I doubt it will get Obama reelected. Will they defame ordinary Americans seeking redress of grievance? You betcha!


----------



## JakeStarkey

The fall from grace is real, not propaganda orchestrated, generated by the Tea Party reps in Congress.

Choices have consquences, and the Tea RepWanks and the Tea Party movement are being given the consquences of their choices.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> The fall from grace is real, not propaganda orchestrated, generated by the Tea Party reps in Congress.
> 
> Choices have consquences, and the Tea RepWanks and the Tea Party movement are being given the consquences of their choices.



RINOs are an endangered species. Sorry.


----------



## Dot Com

4 teh lulz


----------



## Divine Wind

saveliberty said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> I probably wouldn't use the NYT to make my point about a poll(s) the NYT has an opinon on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they're part of the Zionist Socialist Elite conspiracy?
> 
> Feel free to post a current poll you're more comfortable with making a point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, because it is not what unbiased reporting does.  Wow, you have some serious issues going on there.
Click to expand...


Ad hominem attacks do not change the fact the Tea Party is sinking under the weight of its own arrogance and extremism.

Americans See Tea Party Politicians More Negatively, Says Poll - FoxNews.com


> Tea Party-backed politicians say voters sent them to Washington to change the tone in the nation's capital and do the people's work. But according to a new poll, they are increasingly ineffective in achieving that goal.
> 
> A Pew Research/Washington Post poll finds 29 percent of those asked think Tea Party members have had a mostly negative effect in Congress. That's up 11 percent in the eight short months since most of those members took office.
> 
> There are two other pieces of bad news for members who support the Tea Party in this poll. The first is that 35 percent of respondents think the group has not had much of an effect at all. Worse is that 28 percent of independents say that Tea Party members have had a negative effect, while 24 percent of the coveted group say they have had a positive impact. In January, twice as many respondents (29 percent to 14) expected the Tea Party-backed group to have a positive effect.
> 
> The recent standoff in Washington over raising the debt ceiling is the latest fight to highlight the divide not only between Republicans and Democrats, but between Republicans and staunch Tea Party members. The most notable Republicans to vote "no" on raising the limit include presidential contenders and Tea Party favorites Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul.
> 
> The Pew Research/Washington Post poll was conducted Aug. 4-7 among 1,001 national adults.
> 
> Read more: Americans See Tea Party Politicians More Negatively, Says Poll - FoxNews.com


----------



## JakeStarkey

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fall from grace is real, not propaganda orchestrated, generated by the Tea Party reps in Congress.
> 
> Choices have consquences, and the Tea RepWanks and the Tea Party movement are being given the consquences of their choices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RINOs are an endangered species. Sorry.
Click to expand...


The RINOs on the far extremist right of the Republican Party are indeed an endangered species.


----------



## Uncensored2008

JakeStarkey said:


> The RINOs on the far extremist right of the Republican Party are indeed an endangered species.



You just use words with no clue as to what they mean, don't you, troll?

{Republican In Name Only (RINO), is a pejorative term that refers to a member of the Republican Party of the United States whose political views or actions are considered insufficiently conservative or otherwise not conforming to Party positions.}

Republican In Name Only - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even for a feral baboon, you're pretty fucking stupid - monkey boi...


----------



## saveliberty

Divine.Wind said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because they're part of the Zionist Socialist Elite conspiracy?
> 
> Feel free to post a current poll you're more comfortable with making a point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, because it is not what unbiased reporting does.  Wow, you have some serious issues going on there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ad hominem attacks do not change the fact the Tea Party is sinking under the weight of its own arrogance and extremism.
> 
> Americans See Tea Party Politicians More Negatively, Says Poll - FoxNews.com
> 
> 
> 
> Tea Party-backed politicians say voters sent them to Washington to change the tone in the nation's capital and do the people's work. But according to a new poll, they are increasingly ineffective in achieving that goal.
> 
> A Pew Research/Washington Post poll finds 29 percent of those asked think Tea Party members have had a mostly negative effect in Congress. That's up 11 percent in the eight short months since most of those members took office.
> 
> There are two other pieces of bad news for members who support the Tea Party in this poll. The first is that 35 percent of respondents think the group has not had much of an effect at all. Worse is that 28 percent of independents say that Tea Party members have had a negative effect, while 24 percent of the coveted group say they have had a positive impact. In January, twice as many respondents (29 percent to 14) expected the Tea Party-backed group to have a positive effect.
> 
> The recent standoff in Washington over raising the debt ceiling is the latest fight to highlight the divide not only between Republicans and Democrats, but between Republicans and staunch Tea Party members. The most notable Republicans to vote "no" on raising the limit include presidential contenders and Tea Party favorites Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul.
> 
> The Pew Research/Washington Post poll was conducted Aug. 4-7 among 1,001 national adults.
> 
> Read more: Americans See Tea Party Politicians More Negatively, Says Poll - FoxNews.com
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Yes, well, this is very similiar to all the crap I heard before the November elections last year.  How did that work for you?

The steps S&P recommended are a clone to what the Tea Party has advocated for more than a year.  The entitlement crowd is angry.  Big deal.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Uncensored2008 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The RINOs on the far extremist right of the Republican Party are indeed an endangered species.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just use words with no clue as to what they mean, don't you, troll?
> 
> {Republican In Name Only (RINO), is a pejorative term that refers to a member of the Republican Party of the United States whose political views or actions are considered insufficiently conservative or otherwise not conforming to Party positions.}
> 
> Republican In Name Only - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Even for a feral baboon, you're pretty fucking stupid - monkey boi...
Click to expand...


I keep telling yall not to insult the rino's jakes not a rino he's a troll


----------



## Uncensored2008

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I keep telling yall not to insult the rino's jakes not a rino he's a troll



Jake is a feral baboon.

{Feral Baboon - a poster who does nothing except chatter loudly and fling shit.}


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> A successful troll is all of those things.  But bigreb and Uncensored and their buddies are very poor trolls, which lends to the merriment around here.



It's very revealing when I notice at the bottom of the reply there a section for thanks. Why jake is it that I hardly ever see a republican giving you a thank you? Why is 9 out of 10 times it's someone from the FAR FAR left thanking you? Dot com thank you in this reply.

Jake if I was you and I claimned to be a republican when a left tard thank me I would have to re-evaluate my thinking.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Uncensored2008 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep telling yall not to insult the rino's jakes not a rino he's a troll
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jake is a feral baboon.
> 
> {Feral Baboon - a poster who does nothing except chatter loudly and fling shit.}
Click to expand...


that is true.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

JakeStarkey said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fall from grace is real, not propaganda orchestrated, generated by the Tea Party reps in Congress.
> 
> Choices have consquences, and the Tea RepWanks and the Tea Party movement are being given the consquences of their choices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RINOs are an endangered species. Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The RINOs on the far extremist right of the Republican Party are indeed an endangered species.
Click to expand...


The RINOs are those who talk like Republicans during their campaign and then spend like Dems once elected.
The new Republicans in the House and Senate who said they weren't going to raise taxes have kept their promise. There will be more like them after 2012 and fewer pretend Republicans like you.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Let's hope we have more fiscally responsive folks in both parties.

However, the Tea Party wanks who voted no are in for a very rough election, as each should be.


----------



## Synthaholic

JakeStarkey said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hate to break it to you, but if unemployment is above 9%, your boyfriend will lose no matter who is on the Republican ticket.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are a fool.
Click to expand...




BDBoop said:


> The 'fool' bit was established long ago.



Yup!


----------



## Divine Wind

saveliberty said:


> Yes, well, this is very similiar to all the crap I heard before the November elections last year.  How did that work for you?



Actually pretty good in taking the House majority, but we lost an opportunity to take the Senate because the Tea Party thought it was smarter to lose to a Democrat than win with a Republican who didn't vote exactly the way they _thought_ should be done.

So far, the Tea Party candidates from last November have done two things: They've run into reality and pissed off both those who voted for them by not doing enough and those who voted against them by doing too much.  

Political rhetoric by them or those on this forum is nice, but, in the end, it will be up to the voters to decide.  You know, those same folks participating in polls.


----------



## saveliberty

I don't think the Tea Party elected have ticked their base off at all.  It has polarized Democrats against them, but they already saw that coming.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Let's hope we have more fiscally responsive folks in both parties.
> 
> However, the Tea Party wanks who voted no are in for a very rough election, as each should be.



Troll do you know what the definition of the word fiscally responsible is?



> fis·cal (fskl)
> adj.
> 1. Of or relating to government expenditures, revenues, and debt: a fiscal policy of incurring budget deficits to stimulate a weak economy.
> 2. Of or relating to finance or finances.
> 
> 
> re·spon·si·ble
> &#8194; &#8194;[ri-spon-suh-buhl] Show IPA
> 
> adjective
> 1.
> answerable or accountable, as for something within one's power, control, or management (often followed by to  or for ): He is responsible to the president for his decisions.
> 
> 2.
> involving accountability or responsibility: a responsible position.
> 
> 3.
> chargeable with being the author, cause, or occasion of something (usually followed by for ): Termites were responsible for the damage.
> 
> 4.
> having a capacity for moral decisions and therefore accountable; capable of rational thought or action: The defendant is not responsible for his actions.
> 
> 5.
> able to discharge obligations or pay debts.



How long has Harry Reid been in the senate?
Nancy Polise in the house?
Dick Durband?
Fucku shmore?
John McCain?
Why are we at 16 trillion dollars in debt?
The tea party was sent to D.C. to fix those ones who have always been in congress fuck upo
TRhey are the party of responsibility. They are taking care of Business.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, well, this is very similiar to all the crap I heard before the November elections last year.  How did that work for you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually pretty good in taking the House majority, but we lost an opportunity to take the Senate because the Tea Party thought it was smarter to lose to a Democrat than win with a Republican who didn't vote exactly the way they _thought_ should be done.
> 
> So far, the Tea Party candidates from last November have done two things: They've run into reality and pissed off both those who voted for them by not doing enough and those who voted against them by doing too much.
> 
> Political rhetoric by them or those on this forum is nice, but, in the end, it will be up to the voters to decide.  You know, those same folks participating in polls.
Click to expand...


I would whether lose to a Conservative Democrat than have a rino like snow win any day of the week. Stop being partisan for a change.


----------



## Divine Wind

saveliberty said:


> I don't think the Tea Party elected have ticked their base off at all.  It has polarized Democrats against them, but they already saw that coming.



Isn't that how it goes in every election among extremists?  I mean, look how bent out of shape the extreme right has been since November 2, 2008.  You've have thunk the commie won the Cold War instead of just America electing a left winger after 8 years of Neo-Conservatism.  

Anyone who follows history can see these things swing like a pendulum but always end up on the middle at the end of the day.



bigrebnc1775 said:


> I would whether lose to a Conservative Democrat than have a rino like snow win any day of the week. Stop being partisan for a change.



Do you mean Olympia Snowe of Maine?  Dude, you should take your own advice about partisanship. So which "Conservative Democrat" would you favor voting for in place of Olympia Snowe when she comes up for reelection?


----------



## saveliberty

Divine.Wind said:


> Isn't that how it goes in every election among extremists?  I mean, look how bent out of shape the extreme right has been since November 2, 2008.  You've have thunk the commie won the Cold War instead of just America electing a left winger after 8 years of Neo-Conservatism.
> 
> Anyone who follows history can see these things swing like a pendulum but always end up on the middle at the end of the day.



I think people though Obama would end up in the middle too, but I don't see that yet.  I do like the pendulum analogy Divine.


----------



## Uncensored2008

saveliberty said:


> I think people though Obama would end up in the middle too, but I don't see that yet.  I do like the pendulum analogy Divine.



Why would anyone think that Obama would end up in the middle? That is simply delusional. Obama is a leftist radical from the Bill Ayers camp. He may not be able to govern from a Weather Underground perspective, but the base philosophy he operates from is that of the authoritarian, command economy ideals of the left. 

If the "moderates" elect David Duke, he ain't going center either.


----------



## Divine Wind

saveliberty said:


> I think people though Obama would end up in the middle too, but I don't see that yet.  I do like the pendulum analogy Divine.



He's come more to center than he started out, but agree he's not there yet..if ever.  Still, in order to get anything done in Washington, all politicians need to move toward center since nothing else will make it all the way from the House to the Oval Office as we've seen with several forms of legislation.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the Tea Party elected have ticked their base off at all.  It has polarized Democrats against them, but they already saw that coming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that how it goes in every election among extremists?  I mean, look how bent out of shape the extreme right has been since November 2, 2008.  You've have thunk the commie won the Cold War instead of just America electing a left winger after 8 years of Neo-Conservatism.
> 
> Anyone who follows history can see these things swing like a pendulum but always end up on the middle at the end of the day.
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would whether lose to a Conservative Democrat than have a rino like snow win any day of the week. Stop being partisan for a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean Olympia Snowe of Maine?  Dude, you should take your own advice about partisanship. So which "Conservative Democrat" would you favor voting for in place of Olympia Snowe when she comes up for reelection?
Click to expand...


Yes I mean Olympia Snowe. To want a conservative democrat to win over a RINO Republican is not being partisan. You do know what being partisan ius don't you?
I'll get back to you on the Conservative Democrat.


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Yes I mean Olympia Snowe. To want a conservative democrat to win over a RINO Republican is not being partisan. *You do know what being partisan ius don't you?*
> I'll get back to you on the Conservative Democrat.



Yes, I know what a partisan is, but it's strictly the book definition.  Since it conflicts with your usage, I'd love to hear your definition.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I mean Olympia Snowe. To want a conservative democrat to win over a RINO Republican is not being partisan. *You do know what being partisan ius don't you?*
> I'll get back to you on the Conservative Democrat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I know what a partisan is, but it's strictly the book definition.  Since it conflicts with your usage, I'd love to hear your definition.
Click to expand...


You are a team player no matter how rino that person may be I am not.
I do not compromise with my values, I don't care if your shirt has an R or a D But if you have conservative values you'll get my vote.


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I know what a partisan is, but it's strictly the book definition.  Since it conflicts with your usage, I'd love to hear your definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a team player no matter how rino that person may be I am not.
> I do not compromise with my values, I don't care if your shirt has an R or a D But if you have conservative values you'll get my vote.
Click to expand...


Dude, you just defined yourself as a partisan.  BTW, you also defined yourself as someone who "assumes" facts not in evidence.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I know what a partisan is, but it's strictly the book definition.  Since it conflicts with your usage, I'd love to hear your definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a team player no matter how rino that person may be I am not.
> I do not compromise with my values, I don't care if your shirt has an R or a D But if you have conservative values you'll get my vote.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude, you just defined yourself as a partisan.  BTW, you also defined yourself as someone who "assumes" facts not in evidence.
Click to expand...


Dude being Partisan is holding onto one political party that party can do no wrong. Being a Conservative doesn't make me partisan.


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Dude being Partisan is holding onto one political party that party can do no wrong. Being a Conservative doesn't make me partisan.



You can be anything you want when you make up your own definitions.  Like I said, I'll stick with the book definition.

Partisan - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


> : a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance



By your own words of sticking to "conservatives" no matter what, you just admitted you are a partisan.  Your accusation that I am one is an assumption on your part since I never said any such thing.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Divine.Wind said:


> Dude, you just defined yourself as a partisan.  BTW, you also defined yourself as someone who "assumes" facts not in evidence.



He just defined himself as a partisan by saying that he would NOT vote party lines, but rather only vote for those who represent his values?

Are you sure you've thought this through?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dude being Partisan is holding onto one political party that party can do no wrong. Being a Conservative doesn't make me partisan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can be anything you want when you make up your own definitions.  Like I said, I'll stick with the book definition.
> 
> Partisan - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
> 
> 
> 
> : a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> By your own words of sticking to "conservatives" no matter what, you just admitted you are a partisan.  Your accusation that I am one is an assumption on your part since I never said any such thing.
Click to expand...


It's funny you only post the link but not the content within the link

1

: a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially: one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance 

ok you're being a partisan political hack if you support a person just because they have an R or D. I'm a person who has Conservative values and if that makes me partisan so be it. I will hold to my values what will you hold to the party?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Uncensored2008 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, you just defined yourself as a partisan.  BTW, you also defined yourself as someone who "assumes" facts not in evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He just defined himself as a partisan by saying that he would NOT vote party lines, but rather only vote for those who represent his values?
> 
> Are you sure you've thought this through?
Click to expand...


Thank you, I really don't think he did.


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> : a *firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially: one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance
> *
> ok you're being a partisan political hack if you support a person just because they have an R or D. I'm a person who has Conservative values and if that makes me partisan so be it. I will hold to my values what will you hold to the party?



You're getting closer to understanding now.  Agreed, a person who votes only because a person has an R or a D after their name is a partisan.  

You've stated you'll only vote for Conservatives.  So, regardless of their fitness for duty or the job, you are voting for ideological reasons instead of the best person for the job.  That's also partisan under "faction" or "cause", take your pick.

This entire conversation began because I mentioned the Tea Party screwed up in Delaware by picking a half-baked candidate who was never going to win a majority of Yankee blue-blood liberal votes over a "RINO".  The fact you are against "RINOs" is also partisan.  Mike Castle would have beat Chris Coons in the election, but the Tea Party would chose to back an unelectable candidate rather than someone who was not _ideologically pure_ enough for their tastes.  Now tell me that isn't a partisan as hell.


----------



## Lakhota




----------



## Mr. Shaman

cootydog said:


> Here are a few words from one of America's first Tea Party members...A true American Patriot Thomas Jefferson.....


*BULLSHIT!!!*
*
Jefferson* was a *TRUE Renaissance Man*....



> ....a *PROGRESSIVE**!!!!!*



(He couldn't *help* it. He was an *ARIES!!*)​


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> : a *firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially: one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance
> *
> ok you're being a partisan political hack if you support a person just because they have an R or D. I'm a person who has Conservative values and if that makes me partisan so be it. I will hold to my values what will you hold to the party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're getting closer to understanding now.  Agreed, a person who votes only because a person has an R or a D after their name is a partisan.
> 
> You've stated you'll only vote for Conservatives.  So, regardless of their fitness for duty or the job, you are voting for ideological reasons instead of the best person for the job.  That's also partisan under "faction" or "cause", take your pick.
> 
> This entire conversation began because I mentioned the Tea Party screwed up in Delaware by picking a half-baked candidate who was never going to win a majority of Yankee blue-blood liberal votes over a "RINO".  The fact you are against "RINOs" is also partisan.  Mike Castle would have beat Chris Coons in the election, but the Tea Party would chose to back an unelectable candidate rather than someone who was not _ideologically pure_ enough for their tastes.  Now tell me that isn't a partisan as hell.
Click to expand...


No but if thats what you think go with it.  but uncensored  knew exactly what I meant.



Uncensored2008 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, you just defined yourself as a partisan.  BTW, you also defined yourself as someone who "assumes" facts not in evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He just defined himself as a partisan by saying that he would NOT vote party lines, but rather only vote for those who represent his values?
> 
> Are you sure you've thought this through?
Click to expand...


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> No but if thats what you think go with it.  but uncensored  knew exactly what I meant.



No what?  That you disagree with Merriam-Webster?  That you make up your own definition of what partisan means?  

Dude, are you asserting that because Uncensored agreed with you that you are correct?  By that logic, since 66,882,230 voters said Barack Obama was the best choice for President and we should let him run the country over the 58,343,671 who voted for John McCain, then you should accept them as being correct.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The far right extremists like Uncensored and bigreb make up their own definitions all the time then demand we agree with their unreal view of their imaginary universe.

They then get mad when their nonsense is pointed out for what it is, nonsense.

Tis what tis.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Lakhota said:


>



You didn't put a swastika on it.

Your mentor, Josef Goebbels would be disappointed in you.


----------



## saveliberty

I lived in a Democratic Party region for a time.  I typically voted for locals who were conservative leaning.  Changing your ideaology seems unlikely, as it reflects your core values, which don't shift at all or very little for most people.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No but if thats what you think go with it.  but uncensored  knew exactly what I meant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No what?  That you disagree with Merriam-Webster?  That you make up your own definition of what partisan means?
> 
> Dude, are you asserting that because Uncensored agreed with you that you are correct?  By that logic, since 66,882,230 voters said Barack Obama was the best choice for President and we should let him run the country over the 58,343,671 who voted for John McCain, then you should accept them as being correct.
Click to expand...


No that I disagree with your Partisan political stupid ass.
You are a partisan political hack if you vote for a person just because they have a D or an R. I am not going to change my values to vote for a RINO just because they may have an R. If you change your values for the party then that speaks volumes about your character and that tells mne you had no values worth anything to begin with.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> The far right extremists like Uncensored and bigreb make up their own definitions all the time then demand we agree with their unreal view of their imaginary universe.
> 
> They then get mad when their nonsense is pointed out for what it is, nonsense.
> 
> Tis what tis.



And here we have the troll. Whats the matter trolly are you politicing for troll of the year?


----------



## Uncensored2008

bigrebnc1775 said:


> And here we have the troll. Whats the matter trolly are you politicing for troll of the year?




Jake is sitting in his tree, flinging feces at those who pass by. He has no idea what is going on, nor does he care. He is simply flinging shit - it's what he does.

If you feed him a banana (by paying attention to him) he will up the ferocity of his antics, if you ignore him, he will leave.

He is but a feral baboon and will behave as baboons do.


----------



## Neotrotsky

The Left is trying hard to spin the 
political reality and story facing Papa Obama
Which is why you see the Left trolls and the MSM push RINOs in the primary 
knowing that a RINO will decrease base turnout in the primary and general election
Then, any Republican in the general election will be played as "radical" no matter who

After all, it is not like Papa Obama can run on his record
Papa ObamaCare? only the extreme left or fools push that as a success



t/p HotAir

*Obama&#8217;s nightmare economic re-election scenario unfolding?*
_*The White House&#8217;s worst-case scenario for the economy on Election Day next year has become Wall Street&#8217;s baseline scenario.* After looking at a string of weak economic reports and Europe&#8217;s growing fear of debt meltdown and contagion, JPMorgan &#8211; led by Obama pal Jamie Dimon &#8211; has just come out with a politically poisonous forecast._

_The megabank now thinks the economy won&#8217;t grow much faster over the next 12 months than it did during the first half of this year &#8212; and that&#8217;s assuming Europe doesn&#8217;t go all pear shaped. It sees GDP growth at just 1.5 percent this year, 1.3 percent next year with unemployment at &#8230; 9.5 percent heading into the final days of the election season. &#8220;The risks of recession are clearly elevated,&#8221; the bank said. Here&#8217;s its reasoning:_
_Consumer sentiment has tumbled and household wealth has deteriorated. Survey measures of capital spending intentions have moved lower and the housing market shows little sign of lifting. Small businesses, retailers, builders and manufacturers all report a weaker business environment. Global growth has disappointed and foreign growth forecasts have been taken lower. In response we are lowering our projection for growth, particularly in the quarters around the turn of the year._

_Team Obama had better permanently shelve any plans of running a __&#8220;Morning in America&#8221;__campaign. In fact, if a) the economic forecasts of Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs are accurate, and b) voters behave as they usually do during bad economic times, then c) Barack Obama will be a one-term president. No president in the modern era has been reelected with the unemployment rate higher than 7.4 percent, much less two percentage points higher._​


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> No that I disagree with your Partisan political stupid ass.
> You are a partisan political hack



Name-calling tells me you have run out of ammunition, cowboy.  Try reloading with a visit to a library.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The far right facists here are being silly as usual, with nothing to offer.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No that I disagree with your Partisan political stupid ass.
> You are a partisan political hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Name-calling tells me you have run out of ammunition, cowboy.  Try reloading with a visit to a library.
Click to expand...


If calling you what you are is name calling so be it. You are a partiusan political hack.
Politican's from time to time change poolitical parties. If obama became a Republican would you vote for him? I really think you would.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Yes, bigreb, you are a political hack.


----------



## Neotrotsky

saveliberty said:


> I lived in a Democratic Party region for a time.  I typically voted for locals who were conservative leaning.  Changing your ideaology seems unlikely, as it reflects your core values, which don't shift at all or very little for most people.



Very true

The main parties have less to do with core values than keeping the status quo
keeping themselves in power which means keeping the crony capitalist system
we have grown over the years 

Speaking of core values


Socialism, communism, fascism, crony capitalism are all forms of some level of CPE's 
 and share little with a true free market system. The Left finds some type of "comfort" in thinking
 fascism is a child of the right and free markets, but they would be wrong. Fascists depend on and thrive on
 a large and intrusive gov't or "big gov't", not small. 

 Indeed
 Peter Drucker
_"the complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism has forced Russia to travel the same road
 toward a totalitarian society of un-freedom and inequality which Germany has been following. Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same.
 Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, and it has proved as much an illusion in Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany."_​Hayek 
 Fascism defined: 
_"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization"

_​

Of course you know who said:
_"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, 
 with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility 
 and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."_​
Since communism or some socialist/statist variants have murdered more
people than any other political system,

one can understand why the Left tries to hide from it.

Of course, they miss the bigger picture
It is a problem of statism and the gov'ts role in our lives.

Quite often many call for certain goals or ends
with no appreciation of the means to get there

Which is why the US is in the mess we are today
Indeed, many on the Left think we will get "right"
this time


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Yes, bigreb, you are a political hack.



and jake is a terrorist.


----------



## JakeStarkey

You are such a goof, bigreb.


----------



## Divine Wind

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No that I disagree with your Partisan political stupid ass.
> You are a partisan political hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Name-calling tells me you have run out of ammunition, cowboy.  Try reloading with a visit to a library.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If calling you what you are is name calling so be it. You are a partiusan political hack.
> Politican's from time to time change poolitical parties. If obama became a Republican would you vote for him? I really think you would.
Click to expand...


LOL.  Duuude!  You have no fucking clue what I am except that I disagree with you.  You're punching at shadows.  Go for it.  It's funny.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Divine.Wind said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name-calling tells me you have run out of ammunition, cowboy.  Try reloading with a visit to a library.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If calling you what you are is name calling so be it. You are a partiusan political hack.
> Politican's from time to time change poolitical parties. If obama became a Republican would you vote for him? I really think you would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL.  Duuude!  You have no fucking clue what I am except that I disagree with you.  You're punching at shadows.  Go for it.  It's funny.
Click to expand...


It really doesn't fucking matter what you are, you are a fucking partisan political hack that is arguing about putting their party first.

At least for 7 replies that has been your febble attempt.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Neotrotsky said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name-calling tells me you have run out of ammunition, cowboy.  Try reloading with a visit to a library.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If calling you what you are is name calling so be it. You are a partiusan political hack.
> Politican's from time to time change poolitical parties. If obama became a Republican would you vote for him? I really think you would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> with 20,000 posts and no original threads started
> and unable to support his lie of "fascist"  with any proof
> and a continuation of antisemitic insults by using the word fascist
> it is nothing but spam
> 
> More sad when he knows it and yet continues
> 
> How sad the Left has become
> 
> 
> the proper term would be troll
Click to expand...


I agree but that post wasn't to jake it was what appears to be another troll


----------



## Rinata

Good!!! They need to fall from grace. Such hypocrites. I came upon this today:

Rep. Chip Cravaack won the midterm elec*tion for Min*nesota in 2010, thanks in part to his extreme Tea*party plat*form. The newly elected con*gress*man even voted for the Paul Ryan Tea*party backed bud*get, that will end medicare and replace it with a voucher pro*gram which seniors would be expected to use to sat*isfy their health needs.

But a lit*tle over*looked fact about Chip Cravaack is that he worked as a pilot for the North*west Air*lines as recently as 2007 and being a pilot means that you are a mem*ber of a Union, thus receiv*ing the ben*e*fits of union nego*ti*ated salaries, vaca*tions and ulti*mately, dis*abil*ity payments.

Recent finan*cial records released by Cravaack showed that he received  $92,273 in 2010 from dis*abil*ity pay*ments he received from North*west. 

Teaparty Congressman Collects Disability From His Union Job


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Rinata said:


> Good!!! They need to fall from grace. Such hypocrites. I came upon this today:
> 
> Rep. Chip Cravaack won the midterm elec*tion for Min*nesota in 2010, thanks in part to his extreme Tea*party plat*form. The newly elected con*gress*man even voted for the Paul Ryan Tea*party backed bud*get, that will end medicare and replace it with a voucher pro*gram which seniors would be expected to use to sat*isfy their health needs.
> 
> But a lit*tle over*looked fact about Chip Cravaack is that he worked as a pilot for the North*west Air*lines as recently as 2007 and being a pilot means that you are a mem*ber of a Union, thus receiv*ing the ben*e*fits of union nego*ti*ated salaries, vaca*tions and ulti*mately, dis*abil*ity payments.
> 
> Recent finan*cial records released by Cravaack showed that he received  $92,273 in 2010 from dis*abil*ity pay*ments he received from North*west.
> 
> Teaparty Congressman Collects Disability From His Union Job



So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.


----------



## Synthaholic

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good!!! They need to fall from grace. Such hypocrites. I came upon this today:
> 
> Rep. Chip Cravaack won the midterm elec*tion for Min*nesota in 2010, thanks in part to his extreme Tea*party plat*form. The newly elected con*gress*man even voted for the Paul Ryan Tea*party backed bud*get, that will end medicare and replace it with a voucher pro*gram which seniors would be expected to use to sat*isfy their health needs.
> 
> But a lit*tle over*looked fact about Chip Cravaack is that he worked as a pilot for the North*west Air*lines as recently as 2007 and being a pilot means that you are a mem*ber of a Union, thus receiv*ing the ben*e*fits of union nego*ti*ated salaries, vaca*tions and ulti*mately, dis*abil*ity payments.
> 
> Recent finan*cial records released by Cravaack showed that he received  $92,273 in 2010 from dis*abil*ity pay*ments he received from North*west.
> 
> Teaparty Congressman Collects Disability From His Union Job
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.
Click to expand...

So who will take watch out for them if the unions get busted and disappear?


----------



## Rinata

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good!!! They need to fall from grace. Such hypocrites. I came upon this today:
> 
> Rep. Chip Cravaack won the midterm elec*tion for Min*nesota in 2010, thanks in part to his extreme Tea*party plat*form. The newly elected con*gress*man even voted for the Paul Ryan Tea*party backed bud*get, that will end medicare and replace it with a voucher pro*gram which seniors would be expected to use to sat*isfy their health needs.
> 
> But a lit*tle over*looked fact about Chip Cravaack is that he worked as a pilot for the North*west Air*lines as recently as 2007 and being a pilot means that you are a mem*ber of a Union, thus receiv*ing the ben*e*fits of union nego*ti*ated salaries, vaca*tions and ulti*mately, dis*abil*ity payments.
> 
> Recent finan*cial records released by Cravaack showed that he received  $92,273 in 2010 from dis*abil*ity pay*ments he received from North*west.
> 
> Are you kidding me???
> 
> Teaparty Congressman Collects Disability From His Union Job
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.
Click to expand...


Hate the unions??? What the frig are you talking about?? I'm trying to point out that Cravaack wants to destroy the very programs that he is taking advantage of!! I didn't mean to stump you!!! Geez.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Rinata said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good!!! They need to fall from grace. Such hypocrites. I came upon this today:
> 
> Rep. Chip Cravaack won the midterm elec*tion for Min*nesota in 2010, thanks in part to his extreme Tea*party plat*form. The newly elected con*gress*man even voted for the Paul Ryan Tea*party backed bud*get, that will end medicare and replace it with a voucher pro*gram which seniors would be expected to use to sat*isfy their health needs.
> 
> But a lit*tle over*looked fact about Chip Cravaack is that he worked as a pilot for the North*west Air*lines as recently as 2007 and being a pilot means that you are a mem*ber of a Union, thus receiv*ing the ben*e*fits of union nego*ti*ated salaries, vaca*tions and ulti*mately, dis*abil*ity payments.
> 
> Recent finan*cial records released by Cravaack showed that he received  $92,273 in 2010 from dis*abil*ity pay*ments he received from North*west.
> 
> Are you kidding me???
> 
> Teaparty Congressman Collects Disability From His Union Job
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hate the unions??? What the frig are you talking about?? I'm trying to point out that Cravaack wants to destroy the very programs that he is taking advantage of!! I didn't mean to stump you!!! Geez.
Click to expand...


Gawh you're fucking stupid, maybe you should read the story. He's a former union member and is intitled to those benifits. You can't have it both ways.  If he's due it then it's his.  After all that is what those union dues are for that he paid.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Synthaholic said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good!!! They need to fall from grace. Such hypocrites. I came upon this today:
> 
> Rep. Chip Cravaack won the midterm elec*tion for Min*nesota in 2010, thanks in part to his extreme Tea*party plat*form. The newly elected con*gress*man even voted for the Paul Ryan Tea*party backed bud*get, that will end medicare and replace it with a voucher pro*gram which seniors would be expected to use to sat*isfy their health needs.
> 
> But a lit*tle over*looked fact about Chip Cravaack is that he worked as a pilot for the North*west Air*lines as recently as 2007 and being a pilot means that you are a mem*ber of a Union, thus receiv*ing the ben*e*fits of union nego*ti*ated salaries, vaca*tions and ulti*mately, dis*abil*ity payments.
> 
> Recent finan*cial records released by Cravaack showed that he received  $92,273 in 2010 from dis*abil*ity pay*ments he received from North*west.
> 
> Teaparty Congressman Collects Disability From His Union Job
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So who will take watch out for them if the unions get busted and disappear?
Click to expand...


The money is there thats what those union dues are for.


----------



## Synthaholic

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.
> 
> 
> 
> So who will take watch out for them if the unions get busted and disappear?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The money is there thats what those union dues are for.
Click to expand...



Try again, dope:

So who will take watch out for them *if the unions get busted and disappear?*


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Synthaholic said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So who will take watch out for them if the unions get busted and disappear?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The money is there thats what those union dues are for.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Try again, dope:
> 
> So who will take watch out for them *if the unions get busted and disappear?*
Click to expand...


If the unions are busted up the money is there unless it's has been laundered by the union thugs stupid.

Sue the union bosses take their nice homes from them.


----------



## Chris

The Tea Party helped the Dems keep the Senate.

And they are going to help elect Obama to a second term.


----------



## Dot Com

Chris said:


> The Tea Party helped the Dems keep the Senate.
> 
> And they are going to help elect Obama to a second term.



Yeppers. Their approval ratings are in the tank w/ Paylands.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chris said:


> The Tea Party helped the Dems keep the Senate.
> 
> And they are going to help elect Obama to a second term.


The TEA party was the reson you got your ass kicked in the house.
We don't need anymore liberals then whats alrady there in the senate regrardless what they are republican or democrat


----------



## JakeStarkey

The Senate is going to stay Dem because of the TeaParty, and BHO may very well remain president because of the TeaPots.  The House will remain GOP unless the TeaParty forms its own party to run candidates.  Time will tell.


----------



## Synthaholic

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The money is there thats what those union dues are for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try again, dope:
> 
> So who will take watch out for them *if the unions get busted and disappear?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If the unions are busted up the money is there unless it's has been laundered by the union thugs stupid.
> 
> Sue the union bosses take their nice homes from them.
Click to expand...

You are truly stupid.


----------



## Rinata

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So he was injuried while working on a union job. Aren't unions supposed to take care of their injuried unionb members? Why do you hate the unions for doing this? You are being a fuckinh hypocrite for even mentioning it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hate the unions??? What the frig are you talking about?? I'm trying to point out that Cravaack wants to destroy the very programs that he is taking advantage of!! I didn't mean to stump you!!! Geez.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Gawh you're fucking stupid, maybe you should read the story. He's a former union member and is intitled to those benifits. You can't have it both ways.  If he's due it then it's his.  After all that is what those union dues are for that he paid.
Click to expand...


No, YOU ARE STUPID!!!! Why is he collecting the benefits when he thinks it's wrong to even receive these benefits??? Well???


----------



## JakeStarkey

Hypocrisy is rank in both the left and the right.  $$$ corrupts most everybody.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

> The TEA party was the reson you got your ass kicked in the house.
> We don't need anymore liberals then whats alrady there in the senate regrardless what they are republican or democrat.



You cant compare mid-term elections to a general election. Independents, moderates, and weak democrats who stayed home during the MT election are more likely to vote in a general election where the president is running for re-election; and the majority will vote for Obama because theyre turned off by the TPM, turned off by whomever the GOP presidential candidate is, and they voted for Obama the last time. 

The mid-term elections reflected voter turnout in mostly homogeneous republican districts. When statewide elections are reviewed for 2010, however, where the voting population is more diverse  such as California, Nevada, New York, Colorado, and Connecticut  the TPM candidates lost governor and senate races because the voters rejected their radical, divisive message. 

The 2012 election, therefore, will be more like the senate and governor races in 2010, where a more diverse voter population, fed up with TPM extremism and obstructionism, will spell trouble for the GOP.


----------



## Zona

Chris said:


> The Tea Party helped the Dems keep the Senate.
> 
> And they are going to help elect Obama to a second term.


----------

