Fact is fact, Tea Partiers are extremists

[Vast LWC]

There's a difference between listening and understanding.

You lack understanding.

There's not a single fucking thing wrong with "ranting" about that dangerous schmuck in the Oval Office.

And you are either stupid or a fucking liar: What Mr. Levin said that day was (a) said in jocularity and only a pontificating asshat would even TRY to pretend otherwise. (B) it was very much on par with the old line about the old crow that told Winston Churchill, "if you were my husband, I would put poison in your tea," to which the venerable old man replied, "Madam, if I were married to you, I would drink it." (c) You heard nothing of the sort. The ACTUAL exchange was:

CALLER: I just wanna say, Obama is a lot smarter than you folks give him credit for. You guys were on a roll, I have to admit, with all those tea parties. Everything was rolling along, the Republicans were gaining momentum. And he managed to change your entire conversational focus. And you let those three hundred thousand people —

HOST: My God. He’s so smart. His own party voted against him on Guantanamo Bay. How stupid was that, Cindy? His own party refused to fund the closing of Guantanamo Bay.

CALLER. Yeah but you know he can just move those people over here anyway. He’s already doing it with the one guy.

HOST: Yeah, sure, he can do whatever he wants. Let me ask you a question. Why do you hate this country?

CALLER: No, I love this country.

HOST: (angrily shouting) I SAID WHY DO YOU HATE MY COUNTRY! WHY DO YOU HATE MY CONSTITUTION? WHY DO YOU HATE MY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE?

You just said it. He can blow off Congress. He can do whatever he wants, right?

CALLER: Well, he seems to, he just moved (inaudible).

HOST: Answer me this, are you a married woman? Yes or no?

CALLER: Yes.

HOST: Well I don’t know why your husband doesn’t put a gun to his temple. Get the hell out of here.

Criticizing Glen Beck for his lack of SUBSTANCE is also perfectly valid. And Frum is a waffling dipstick. Jeez. What's wrong with you? Are you that unfamiliar with the concept of firm principles?

Your real problem with Mark Levin is that you lack the intellectual ability to honestly or effectively address his points. Unlike you, he knows what he's talking about.

OK, so let me see if I have this right:

Levin didn't tell the woman to kill herself...

Instead he said that she is such a horrible person for having a different viewpoint than his own that the people she most loves in the world should kill themselves rather than be near her.

Wow. And that's better how, exactly?

But of course, the fact that in spirit my criticism was correct, doesn't matter to you really, does it? It's all about finding holes in the details of the criticism for you folks, isn't it?

And in addition, what the FUCK kind of an answer to the woman's comments is:

HOST: (angrily shouting) I SAID WHY DO YOU HATE MY COUNTRY! WHY DO YOU HATE MY CONSTITUTION? WHY DO YOU HATE MY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Did he give that woman a chance to "to honestly or effectively address his points"? Whatever those "points" may have been?

Mark Levin doesn't have logical points to "intellectually address". He screams talking points and rants rationalizations for those talking points that have no basis in reality.

I find your assertion that Mark Levin has a greater intellectual capacity than me, or anyone else for that matter, to be utterly hilarious.

 

[Vast LWC]

LWC...its RW Logic, an oxymoron...go figure.

*shrugs*

Yep, that's extremist logic. No compromise, ever.

 

[Stephanie]

There's a difference between listening and understanding.

I find your assertion that Mark Levin has a greater intellectual capacity than me, or anyone else for that matter, to be utterly hilarious.

now you see why a lot of us say the same thing about your Dear Leader, the Obama

 

[Liability]

There's a difference between listening and understanding.

You lack understanding.

There's not a single fucking thing wrong with "ranting" about that dangerous schmuck in the Oval Office.

And you are either stupid or a fucking liar: What Mr. Levin said that day was (a) said in jocularity and only a pontificating asshat would even TRY to pretend otherwise. (B) it was very much on par with the old line about the old crow that told Winston Churchill, "if you were my husband, I would put poison in your tea," to which the venerable old man replied, "Madam, if I were married to you, I would drink it." (c) You heard nothing of the sort. The ACTUAL exchange was:

CALLER: I just wanna say, Obama is a lot smarter than you folks give him credit for. You guys were on a roll, I have to admit, with all those tea parties. Everything was rolling along, the Republicans were gaining momentum. And he managed to change your entire conversational focus. And you let those three hundred thousand people —

HOST: My God. He’s so smart. His own party voted against him on Guantanamo Bay. How stupid was that, Cindy? His own party refused to fund the closing of Guantanamo Bay.

CALLER. Yeah but you know he can just move those people over here anyway. He’s already doing it with the one guy.

HOST: Yeah, sure, he can do whatever he wants. Let me ask you a question. Why do you hate this country?

CALLER: No, I love this country.

HOST: (angrily shouting) I SAID WHY DO YOU HATE MY COUNTRY! WHY DO YOU HATE MY CONSTITUTION? WHY DO YOU HATE MY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE?

You just said it. He can blow off Congress. He can do whatever he wants, right?

CALLER: Well, he seems to, he just moved (inaudible).

HOST: Answer me this, are you a married woman? Yes or no?

CALLER: Yes.

HOST: Well I don’t know why your husband doesn’t put a gun to his temple. Get the hell out of here.

Criticizing Glen Beck for his lack of SUBSTANCE is also perfectly valid. And Frum is a waffling dipstick. Jeez. What's wrong with you? Are you that unfamiliar with the concept of firm principles?

Your real problem with Mark Levin is that you lack the intellectual ability to honestly or effectively address his points. Unlike you, he knows what he's talking about.

OK, so let me see if I have this right:

Levin didn't tell the woman to kill herself...

Instead he said that she is such a horrible person for having a different viewpoint than his own that the people she most loves in the world should kill themselves rather than be near her.

Wow. And that's better how, exactly?

But of course, the fact that in spirit my criticism was correct, doesn't matter to you really, does it? It's all about finding holes in the details of the criticism for you folks, isn't it?

And in addition, what the FUCK kind of an answer to the woman's comments is:

HOST: (angrily shouting) I SAID WHY DO YOU HATE MY COUNTRY! WHY DO YOU HATE MY CONSTITUTION? WHY DO YOU HATE MY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Did he give that woman a chance to "to honestly or effectively address his points"? Whatever those "points" may have been?

Mark Levin doesn't have logical points to "intellectually address". He screams talking points and rants rationalizations for those talking points that have no basis in reality.

I find your assertion that Mark Levin has a greater intellectual capacity than me, or anyone else for that matter, to be utterly hilarious.

I couldn't give a rat's ass if you dislike the style of Mark Levin. I sometimes wish he wouldn't cut off some of his stupid ass liberal guests quite so quickly, too. But that's just the style of his show. It has nothing to do with the fact (and it is a fact) that he is, intellectually, clearly and vastly superior to you in every imaginable way. His depth of knowledge and his adherence to a firm, logical, consistent & coherent set of principles sre also vastly superior to any marginal ability you have long those lines.

I find it incredibly hilarious that you think you are his equal intellectually. You absolutely aren't. You are a lightweight. You are a bundle of irrational contradictions. You couldn't hold a candle to Mark Levin. That's the truth.

And no. He does not scream talking points. He carefully (and often) articulates the rational supporting the principles of conservatism in considerable depth, on his radio program as well as in his scholarly written works. (He does sometimes put on a bit of a show for added entertainment value. That much is true. But you are so close-minded, that's ALL you are able or willing to see and hear.)

Levin is a genius. You simply are not.

 

[Liability]

Oh, and finally Vast LWC said one thing right.

Mr. Levin absolutely never told the woman that she should kill herself NOR did he advocate that being married to her was sufficient ground for the husband to kill himself. What he said -- obviously in jest -- was that he didn't understand how the husband could REFRAIN from killing himself being married to HER!

When Groucho once suggested to another "person" that he should go stand at the wrong end of a shooting gallery, Groucho wasn't really urging suicide, either.

Neither was Winston Churchill when he made his famous quip.

 

[MarcATL]

I couldn't give a rat's ass if you dislike the style of Mark Levin. I sometimes wish he wouldn't cut off some of his stupid ass liberal guests quite so quickly, too. But that's just the style of his show. It has nothing to do with the fact (and it is a fact) that he is, intellectually, clearly and vastly superior to you in every imaginable way. His depth of knowledge and his adherence to a firm, logical, consistent & coherent set of principles sre also vastly superior to any marginal ability you have long those lines.

I find it incredibly hilarious that you think you are his equal intellectually. You absolutely aren't. You are a lightweight. You are a bundle of irrational contradictions. You couldn't hold a candle to Mark Levin. That's the truth.

And no. He does not scream talking points. He carefully (and often) articulates the rational supporting the principles of conservatism in considerable depth, on his radio program as well as in his scholarly written works. (He does sometimes put on a bit of a show for added entertainment value. That much is true. But you are so close-minded, that's ALL you are able or willing to see and hear.)

Levin is a genius. You simply are not.

Your Honor, I present to you....Exhibit F:

 

[Meister]

Do you mind showing some stats to back your bogus claim?....or are you just fear mongering again, Vast. You really have been doing a lot of that lately.

OK, let me get this straight.

I say that I approve of having people able to carry guns everywhere, except for bars.

And that's only because people in bars tend to get drunk and out-of-control.

And that's "fear-mongering"?

Seriously?

Right now I'm laughing at you, Vast.
This is what you stated....word for word:
"I'm thinking the bartenders won't know who not to serve until someone is already shot though."

Why, yes that is fear mongering. I stick by what I said that you have been doing a lot of that lately, without cause I might add.

 

[sealybobo]

The right doesn't agree: National Polls Shatter Myth Of Tea Party As Right Wing Fringe Group

Check out their polls.

Fact is, they are a group of unhappy republicans. Republicans lost. They also have the minority in both houses. A fringe group is a group that isn't mainstream. How many people are needed to be considered a fringe group? Certainly the number falls between 1-49%.

 

[Vast LWC]

Right now I'm laughing at you, Vast.
This is what you stated....word for word:
"I'm thinking the bartenders won't know who not to serve until someone is already shot though."

Why, yes that is fear mongering. I stick by what I said that you have been doing a lot of that lately, without cause I might add.

Excellent, then perhaps you have some examples of "fear mongering" that you can show us all?

Personally I think that stating that it's dangerous to carry firearms in bars, while supporting open carry laws in every other location, is not "fear-mongering", but apparently you seem to be under that impression.

So, again, regale me with some real "fear-mongering".

 

[sealybobo]

The word is used to describe a radical group that has been dissassociated by its mainstream organization. Are the teabaggers a part of the GOP or not? I think they are. Fox seemed to deny it.

The teapartiers claim they are not GOP. If they are, where were they during the Bush years?

They are just disinfranchised Republicans. They'll either vote GOP or Libertarian.

 

[Meister]

The right doesn't agree: National Polls Shatter Myth Of Tea Party As Right Wing Fringe Group

Check out their polls.

Fact is, they are a group of unhappy republicans. Republicans lost. They also have the minority in both houses. A fringe group is a group that isn't mainstream. How many people are needed to be considered a fringe group? Certainly the number falls between 1-49%.

49% are republicans

43% are independents

8% are democrats

55% earn more than $50,000 a year
Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

It's not just "unhappy republicans" that make up this Tea Party movement.....far from it. it looks like a lot of the independents that got barry elected in the last election are part of this movement.

 

[Meister]

The word is used to describe a radical group that has been dissassociated by its mainstream organization. Are the teabaggers a part of the GOP or not? I think they are. Fox seemed to deny it.

The teapartiers claim they are not GOP. If they are, where were they during the Bush years?

They are just disinfranchised Republicans. They'll either vote GOP or Libertarian.

You are misinformed....as usual booboo.

 

[boedicca]

That study has been posted several times on the board this week; the lefties continue to ignore it.

The fact is, the Tea Party movement represents average Americans saying Enough to our imperial government. That's why Obama is on the attack.

 

[Meister]

That study has been posted several times on the board this week; the lefties continue to ignore it.

The fact is, the Tea Party movement represents average Americans saying Enough to our imperial government. That's why Obama is on the attack.

Of course they have to ignore it, it blows there scripted yarn right out of the water, and they have nothing elsse.
Yes it does represent the average American, but the left still needs to attack the movement because they are in some deep #*!% right now.

 

[Vast LWC]

Mark Levin rants about Bill O'Reilly (because O'Reilly disagreed with Levin's extremist name-calling)

“What a buffoon,” Levin said of O’Reilly, host of Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor. “He doesn’t want to talk about socialism. He doesn’t want to talk about the beginnings of this scandal. No. The same guy who claims to have led the boycott against France that forced France to do whatever France was supposed to do. What a joke. What a moron.”

Yeah, what a guy that Levin is... Anyone who's not as extreme as he is, is a "Joke" and a "Buffoon".

 

[Vast LWC]

The right doesn't agree: National Polls Shatter Myth Of Tea Party As Right Wing Fringe Group

Check out their polls.

Fact is, they are a group of unhappy republicans. Republicans lost. They also have the minority in both houses. A fringe group is a group that isn't mainstream. How many people are needed to be considered a fringe group? Certainly the number falls between 1-49%.

49% are republicans

43% are independents

8% are democrats

55% earn more than $50,000 a year
Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

It's not just "unhappy republicans" that make up this Tea Party movement.....far from it. it looks like a lot of the independents that got barry elected in the last election are part of this movement.

A large portion of Republicans started identifying themselves as "Independent" during the 2008 election cycle.

A smaller, but appreciable segment of Republicans switched over to the Democratic party during the same time period.

I would think that these people make up a significant portion of the people you are referring to.

 

[boedicca]

That study has been posted several times on the board this week; the lefties continue to ignore it.

The fact is, the Tea Party movement represents average Americans saying Enough to our imperial government. That's why Obama is on the attack.

Of course they have to ignore it, it blows there scripted yarn right out of the water, and they have nothing elsse.
Yes it does represent the average American, but the left still needs to attack the movement because they are in some deep #*!% right now.

Yes. They're dupes. While Obama drives this country into insolvency, all he has to do is wave a "shiny" attack against Tea Partiers in front of his lefty goldfish. They all swim towards it with their mouths open.

 

[Vast LWC]

Levin on the subject of David Frum:

a “putz,” an “a-hole,”a “frat boy,” “irrelevant,”

Again, because Frum was not extremist enough for his tastes.

 

[Vast LWC]

Yes. They're dupes. While Obama drives this country into insolvency, all he has to do is wave a "shiny" attack against Tea Partiers in front of his lefty goldfish. They all swim towards it with their mouths open.

You put up some figures that you like, and then you talk to each other about it, because no-one else particularly cares.

That's known as an "echo chamber".

 

[Meister]

The right doesn't agree: National Polls Shatter Myth Of Tea Party As Right Wing Fringe Group

Check out their polls.

Fact is, they are a group of unhappy republicans. Republicans lost. They also have the minority in both houses. A fringe group is a group that isn't mainstream. How many people are needed to be considered a fringe group? Certainly the number falls between 1-49%.

49% are republicans

43% are independents

8% are democrats

55% earn more than $50,000 a year
Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

It's not just "unhappy republicans" that make up this Tea Party movement.....far from it. it looks like a lot of the independents that got barry elected in the last election are part of this movement.

A large portion of Republicans started identifying themselves as "Independent" during the 2008 election cycle.

A smaller, but appreciable segment of Republicans switched over to the Democratic party during the same time period.

I would think that these people make up a significant portion of the people you are referring to.

Do you have stats to back up your claim, or is this the only plausible explanation the left can come up with?