Off Topic · Government Shutdown.. (page 2)
IronWillGiroud wrote:martin wrote:playa2 wrote:This US Government shutdown is nothing of the sort. 80% of federal employees are at work locking the country down. No access to National Forests, open waters, and privately funded landmarks is just the beginning. Wait until travel is openly restricted. At some point, people will begin to realize martial law is being implemented RIGHT NOW!A giant stage production to take us down a path.... Beware people. Something bad happening here and they are all in on it whether all of them realize it or not.
if you got nothing but conspiracy theories, please stay out of this discussion. Nothing of the sort is happening.
i thought it was messed up that they kicked out campers of the national parks,
why do national parks always suffer?
if you ask me, we should fund nature and parks much more than we do,
this pisses me off because i love nature and animals
Ditto but it does send the message about how integral government is in the everyday lives of the average Joe.
playa2 wrote:This US Government shutdown is nothing of the sort. 80% of federal employees are at work locking the country down. No access to National Forests, open waters, and privately funded landmarks is just the beginning. Wait until travel is openly restricted. At some point, people will begin to realize martial law is being implemented RIGHT NOW!A giant stage production to take us down a path.... Beware people. Something bad happening here and they are all in on it whether all of them realize it or not.
What would be the end game of something like this though? What would could be gained by something like this?
SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
Living in the south the voting patterns for the most part are more "Liberal" in the cities and on college campus. For the most part.
IN rural areas its a combonation of ignorace, lack of ethnic and religious diversity, and plain old racism. I guess it can be said the formula to racism is "lack of diversity and ignorace". People fear the unkown. Southern cities are changing as the popluation shift continues. North Carolina has had Democratic Governers for decades but we got one now who has to pander to the state legislature who like most states are hacks. These morons are putting thru laws that the justice departmant has to come in and challange. Its a waste of time and money.
Back in the day the Southern Democrat was steep in conservative politics (AKA: President Johnson) and the "Right wing" Liberals like Barry Goldwater was the extreme Republican. Now its backwards.
These Tea Party Demagogs don't have to worry about their constituancy voting them out and the longer they stay in the longer they gain power.
NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
So your end point is that only your bigotry is good bigotry?
NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
Nalod wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
Living in the south the voting patterns for the most part are more "Liberal" in the cities and on college campus. For the most part.
IN rural areas its a combonation of ignorace, lack of ethnic and religious diversity, and plain old racism. I guess it can be said the formula to racism is "lack of diversity and ignorace". People fear the unkown. Southern cities are changing as the popluation shift continues. North Carolina has had Democratic Governers for decades but we got one now who has to pander to the state legislature who like most states are hacks. These morons are putting thru laws that the justice departmant has to come in and challange. Its a waste of time and money.
Back in the day the Southern Democrat was steep in conservative politics (AKA: President Johnson) and the "Right wing" Liberals like Barry Goldwater was the extreme Republican. Now its backwards.
These Tea Party Demagogs don't have to worry about their constituancy voting them out and the longer they stay in the longer they gain power.
it cracks me up how so few reognize that point and senselessly beat their "democrat" or "republican"
GustavBahler wrote:The modern Tea Party was never a grass roots organization. It was conceived and funded by billionaires, their elderly followers were bussed to town hall meetings for free and encouraged to disrupt meetings. Even the name Tea Party has nothing to do with the intent of the original Boston Tea Party which was to fight against unfair competition from the East India Company. These modern "Tea Partiers" have more in common with the forces that the real Tea Partiers were fighting against than anything else.
yes, this.
SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
not for me. Tea Party may technically be a legal, political group but they are domestic terror group by any other name.
Nalod wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
Living in the south the voting patterns for the most part are more "Liberal" in the cities and on college campus. For the most part.
IN rural areas its a combonation of ignorace, lack of ethnic and religious diversity, and plain old racism. I guess it can be said the formula to racism is "lack of diversity and ignorace". People fear the unkown. Southern cities are changing as the popluation shift continues. North Carolina has had Democratic Governers for decades but we got one now who has to pander to the state legislature who like most states are hacks. These morons are putting thru laws that the justice departmant has to come in and challange. Its a waste of time and money.
Back in the day the Southern Democrat was steep in conservative politics (AKA: President Johnson) and the "Right wing" Liberals like Barry Goldwater was the extreme Republican. Now its backwards.
These Tea Party Demagogs don't have to worry about their constituancy voting them out and the longer they stay in the longer they gain power.
Even if the trends you suggest continue (of southern cities becoming more liberal), the state will still center itself as a conservative body. Courtesy of jerrymandering, rural voters in those states will continue to steer the political discourse within their states and on a national level.
And I disagree about your assertion about their being a flipping of political ideology in either party. For every "conservative" Democrat you could name, you had a "liberal" one throughout our history e.g. FDR, Woodrow Wilson, etc. Even Johnson was pretty "liberal" socially considering the number of bills that were passed to recognize women and minorites as equals. His domestic policy also included championing the War Against Poverty, which wreaks of a bleeding heart. The parties were much more dynamic back in the day, which is probably why things got done and did not have all this vitroil. Even Tricky Dick Nixon, who some regard as the father of this new Republican party, founded the Environment Protection Agency and actually tried to reform our healthcare system.
jrodmc wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
So your end point is that only your bigotry is good bigotry?
It's obviously hyperbole but I am half serious. If we continue to bar certain criminals from voting, why not stupid people? Most that vote have no idea what the politics are or what is at stake, so why should they take part in such a process? We should start testing people on the principle of the respective parties and their politicians stance on a given policy, program or event. You fail, you don't vote and make this country a hell of a lot better for it. I think a damn good number of liberals would flunk, so don't presume that I am delusional about the reality of our politics. But I don't think those numbers would come as close to the figure we'd see among conservative voters.
martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
not for me. Tea Party may technically be a legal, political group but they are domestic terror group by any other name.
this is why the middle of the country flocks to groups like the tea party. The liberal rhetoric is loud and IMO disrespectful. The tea partyers might be fucking insane but I find your stance so disrespectful that it goes a long way to explaining why the counter-liberal movement has survived and thrived the way it does. I also find it humorous that the democrats haven't figured out a way to beat a bunch of insane fucking morons. It's like how the Knicks always find a way to play down to their competition. Anwyay, fine, I guess the way to deal with the tea party is to continue to treat them as pariahs and they'll continue to do desperate things. Great strategy, democrats!
SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
So shutting down a government, costing the public hundreds of millions of dollars a day, pushing us ever closer to a recession that will effect nearly 300 million people and the entire world eventually is considered to be a reach as an act of terror? Bin Laden never had shit on that.
NardDogNation wrote:Nalod wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
Living in the south the voting patterns for the most part are more "Liberal" in the cities and on college campus. For the most part.
IN rural areas its a combonation of ignorace, lack of ethnic and religious diversity, and plain old racism. I guess it can be said the formula to racism is "lack of diversity and ignorace". People fear the unkown. Southern cities are changing as the popluation shift continues. North Carolina has had Democratic Governers for decades but we got one now who has to pander to the state legislature who like most states are hacks. These morons are putting thru laws that the justice departmant has to come in and challange. Its a waste of time and money.
Back in the day the Southern Democrat was steep in conservative politics (AKA: President Johnson) and the "Right wing" Liberals like Barry Goldwater was the extreme Republican. Now its backwards.
These Tea Party Demagogs don't have to worry about their constituancy voting them out and the longer they stay in the longer they gain power.
Even if the trends you suggest continue (of southern cities becoming more liberal), the state will still center itself as a conservative body. Courtesy of jerrymandering, rural voters in those states will continue to steer the political discourse within their states and on a national level.
And I disagree about your assertion about their being a flipping of political ideology in either party. For every "conservative" Democrat you could name, you had a "liberal" one throughout our history e.g. FDR, Woodrow Wilson, etc. Even Johnson was pretty "liberal" socially considering the number of bills that were passed to recognize women and minorites as equals. His domestic policy also included championing the War Against Poverty, which wreaks of a bleeding heart. The parties were much more dynamic back in the day, which is probably why things got done and did not have all this vitroil. Even Tricky Dick Nixon, who some regard as the father of this new Republican party, founded the Environment Protection Agency and actually tried to reform our healthcare system.
Yes, Johnsons "Great society" was along the lines of installing social programs and I was being very general for the southern democrat.
I'd say Regan was birthed the modern GOP when he let Jerry Falwell thru the door and party began the lines right wing values.
Toss out the electoral college and make voting compulsary which we would get fair representation but would slam the GOP into a distant memory.
Obama his handicapped by racist overtones. Hilary evokes much hatrid similar to what Obama gets.
I fear we are beating this country back into some fable of "When times were better"...............you know, when we faught wars, argued segregation and when the dictator Eisenhower ran things. WHen Korea was forgotten!!!!
We get the gov't we deserve.
SupremeCommander wrote:Nalod wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
Living in the south the voting patterns for the most part are more "Liberal" in the cities and on college campus. For the most part.
IN rural areas its a combonation of ignorace, lack of ethnic and religious diversity, and plain old racism. I guess it can be said the formula to racism is "lack of diversity and ignorace". People fear the unkown. Southern cities are changing as the popluation shift continues. North Carolina has had Democratic Governers for decades but we got one now who has to pander to the state legislature who like most states are hacks. These morons are putting thru laws that the justice departmant has to come in and challange. Its a waste of time and money.
Back in the day the Southern Democrat was steep in conservative politics (AKA: President Johnson) and the "Right wing" Liberals like Barry Goldwater was the extreme Republican. Now its backwards.
These Tea Party Demagogs don't have to worry about their constituancy voting them out and the longer they stay in the longer they gain power.
it cracks me up how so few reognize that point and senselessly beat their "democrat" or "republican"
Again, that point he made is grossly overstated. The polarization of American politics within the context of Democrats being liberal and Republicans being conservative, did not happen until the Nixon years and beyond through what was known as "The Southern Strategy". That was the turning point for us where states became exclusively. Before that Truman, a Democrat, lost New York, Eisenhower, a Republican, won it as did Kennedy, a Democrat. Today, a Republican could never win in NY on a federal level and a Democrat could never win in TX (though that may change with the influx of those with Mexican heritage coming into voting age).
SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
not for me. Tea Party may technically be a legal, political group but they are domestic terror group by any other name.
this is why the middle of the country flocks to groups like the tea party. The liberal rhetoric is loud and IMO disrespectful. The tea partyers might be fucking insane but I find your stance so disrespectful that it goes a long way to explaining why the counter-liberal movement has survived and thrived the way it does. I also find it humorous that the democrats haven't figured out a way to beat a bunch of insane fucking morons. It's like how the Knicks always find a way to play down to their competition. Anwyay, fine, I guess the way to deal with the tea party is to continue to treat them as pariahs and they'll continue to do desperate things. Great strategy, democrats!
Why not call a spade a spade? They seem more than ready to do the same from their perspective e.g. "Obama was born in Kenya", "Obama is a socialist hell bent on destroying the country", "Liberals don't love America", etc. The difference is that our reality is actually grounded in reason and fact. Their mentality is nothing new; we have seen it play out throughout history. They are the people that persecute great minds like Copernicus for proposing a heliocentric theory of our solar system. We see it today in the opposition to Global Warming. They are the people that suggested that a man can not hold public office because of his religious affiliation e.g. JFK when he was running for President. We see it today with Obama constantly being accused of being a Muslim. It goes on and on. They are little people, with little minds and ultimately, it's our responsibility to drag them into the future. It really is the only way progress has ever been made.
Nalod wrote:NardDogNation wrote:Nalod wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
Living in the south the voting patterns for the most part are more "Liberal" in the cities and on college campus. For the most part.
IN rural areas its a combonation of ignorace, lack of ethnic and religious diversity, and plain old racism. I guess it can be said the formula to racism is "lack of diversity and ignorace". People fear the unkown. Southern cities are changing as the popluation shift continues. North Carolina has had Democratic Governers for decades but we got one now who has to pander to the state legislature who like most states are hacks. These morons are putting thru laws that the justice departmant has to come in and challange. Its a waste of time and money.
Back in the day the Southern Democrat was steep in conservative politics (AKA: President Johnson) and the "Right wing" Liberals like Barry Goldwater was the extreme Republican. Now its backwards.
These Tea Party Demagogs don't have to worry about their constituancy voting them out and the longer they stay in the longer they gain power.
Even if the trends you suggest continue (of southern cities becoming more liberal), the state will still center itself as a conservative body. Courtesy of jerrymandering, rural voters in those states will continue to steer the political discourse within their states and on a national level.
And I disagree about your assertion about their being a flipping of political ideology in either party. For every "conservative" Democrat you could name, you had a "liberal" one throughout our history e.g. FDR, Woodrow Wilson, etc. Even Johnson was pretty "liberal" socially considering the number of bills that were passed to recognize women and minorites as equals. His domestic policy also included championing the War Against Poverty, which wreaks of a bleeding heart. The parties were much more dynamic back in the day, which is probably why things got done and did not have all this vitroil. Even Tricky Dick Nixon, who some regard as the father of this new Republican party, founded the Environment Protection Agency and actually tried to reform our healthcare system.
Yes, Johnsons "Great society" was along the lines of installing social programs and I was being very general for the southern democrat.
I'd say Regan was birthed the modern GOP when he let Jerry Falwell thru the door and party began the lines right wing values.
Toss out the electoral college and make voting compulsary which we would get fair representation but would slam the GOP into a distant memory.
Obama his handicapped by racist overtones. Hilary evokes much hatrid similar to what Obama gets.
I fear we are beating this country back into some fable of "When times were better"...............you know, when we faught wars, argued segregation and when the dictator Eisenhower ran things. WHen Korea was forgotten!!!!
We get the gov't we deserve.
I get how people interpret Reagan to be the father of the new GOP. He was, after all, the Republican that made "bat shit crazy" fashionable but would he have ever been able to achieve that without Nixon? Remember that Nixon was the dude that broke the stranglehold that Democrats had been developing on the executive branch and legitimized the Republican party. With the strong liberal voice back in those days, I don't think this country would've become as conservative as it did. Nixon wasn't "bat shit crazy" (although clearly paranoid) but certainly oriented the party in a manner to include this element. I don't think he ever imagined that this part of his base would actually take the party over though. Unintended consequences though, doesn't mean that this isn't his creation though.
In any case, I'm just nitpicking at this point and I do apologize. I think we got a major problem on our hands with these Tea Party types and don't see them going away anytime soon. Hilary will win in 2016 (though I'd support Elizabeth Warren if she ran) but politics is fickle and stupid is endemic. I see a Tea Party type making a serious presidential run in the not too distant future. This is after all, the Republican party.
SupremeCommander wrote:this is why the middle of the country flocks to groups like the tea party. The liberal rhetoric is loud and IMO disrespectful. The tea partyers might be fucking insane but I find your stance so disrespectful that it goes a long way to explaining why the counter-liberal movement has survived and thrived the way it does. I also find it humorous that the democrats haven't figured out a way to beat a bunch of insane fucking morons. It's like how the Knicks always find a way to play down to their competition. Anwyay, fine, I guess the way to deal with the tea party is to continue to treat them as pariahs and they'll continue to do desperate things. Great strategy, democrats!
What is the liberal rhetoric that is loud and disrespectful? Especially regarding the current gov't shutdown and debt ceiling.
Obama has asked for clean CR and to raise debt ceiling cleanly (essentially what has happened before he got to office). He caved on Sequester, which was exactly everything Rep asked for.
ObamaCare is law of land. Passed by Senate and Congress and signed by President. We just had another election whereby Romney ran against ObamaCare and lost big time. And now a minority of Congress has shut down gov't (est $30-60M lost per day) and threatens to blow past debt ceiling because.... ? Because they can hold nation hostage. This is not normal legislative process. This is "i can't have my way, I will make everything blow up". 40 votes to kill Obamacare and nothing happened, so what next? Hostage-taking.
This is minority rule if they dont get their way, not democracy of elected officials and compromise. There are enough votes in Congress to pass Senate CR and Boehner won't bring it up because it will mean he would lose his Speakership.
Let's be clear: Liberals haven't found a way to beat completely fucking morons in Tea Party cause Republicans have enabled them at every step, riding their wave of pseudo popularity (because they are losing the women, minority votes - generally grasping at straws). It comes down to money and primary run-offs: Republicans are scared shitless of having a primary against a Tea Party hopeful. Check out what Christine O'Donnell did in Delaware. Ran against a former Republican Governor 85-92 and Representative from 93-2010 in Special Election Senate race for Biden's old spot. He would have been HEAVY favorite to win against Democrat running for same seat. Lost to ODonnell. McConnell is scared shitless in Kentucky and may lose his seat because it will be a money drain in a Primary. This is Koch brothers and others saying we have money and if Republican's don't favor Tea Party hard line stances, they will face Primary opponent.
This has nothing to do with what Liberals are doing or saying: Big money carved out of Citizens United is fueling Tea Party. If you think it's grass roots, you are not informed enough.
NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
not for me. Tea Party may technically be a legal, political group but they are domestic terror group by any other name.
this is why the middle of the country flocks to groups like the tea party. The liberal rhetoric is loud and IMO disrespectful. The tea partyers might be fucking insane but I find your stance so disrespectful that it goes a long way to explaining why the counter-liberal movement has survived and thrived the way it does. I also find it humorous that the democrats haven't figured out a way to beat a bunch of insane fucking morons. It's like how the Knicks always find a way to play down to their competition. Anwyay, fine, I guess the way to deal with the tea party is to continue to treat them as pariahs and they'll continue to do desperate things. Great strategy, democrats!
Why not call a spade a spade? They seem more than ready to do the same from their perspective e.g. "Obama was born in Kenya", "Obama is a socialist hell bent on destroying the country", "Liberals don't love America", etc. The difference is that our reality is actually grounded in reason and fact. Their mentality is nothing new; we have seen it play out throughout history. They are the people that persecute great minds like Copernicus for proposing a heliocentric theory of our solar system. We see it today in the opposition to Global Warming. They are the people that suggested that a man can not hold public office because of his religious affiliation e.g. JFK when he was running for President. We see it today with Obama constantly being accused of being a Muslim. It goes on and on. They are little people, with little minds and ultimately, it's our responsibility to drag them into the future. It really is the only way progress has ever been made.
Call a spade a spade. Yes indeedy. Quite an ironic choice of terms. Your subliminal liberal rhetoric, so quiet and respectful.
So of course, liberal theology brings you the earth as a planet, Copernicus being persecuted for saying so, Global Warming, and we'll throw in a secret love of Catholicism just to throw you conservative religionists a bone. You've got some great facts there.
"We" and "They".
Keep taking names, I'm sure when the powers that be come knocking on your door, you'll be on Obama's personal foundation of determining who's stupid and who's actually worthy of the right to vote.
Yes, liberalism. Bringing you the tremendous facts of abortion, euthanasia and other fine examples of "reason and fact." Tell me, when do "we" start deciding who's actually worthy of life itself? Why stop at voting? Oh wait, you of the "we" are already discussing that, aren't "we"?
Global warming, right. You are really still chewing on Mr. Nobel's hockey stick? Did you buy lots of stock in end of the world Y2K futures?
Keep paying your income taxes. Keep your worldview that Uncle Sam is going to take care of everything for you, because when "we" are in power, everything is being done correctly. Only Harvard grads need apply to positions of power, you idiot conservatives who live on worldviews based on faith or anything other than "our" rational "facts" please get on the train.
Unbelievable.
jrodmc wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:NardDogNation wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:I am not a Republican or a Republican sympathizer - I think they suck. But I also think the Democrats and liberals suck just as much. Obama has met with no one and has made it *impossible* for the Tea Partyers to take anything back to their constituencies.
I think both parties are bought but one sucks a lot less than the other, which is why I vote Democrat in any national election. I'm also not following you on Obama not being diplomatic with the Tea Party as a whole. When he extended the Bush era tax cuts, maintained our absurd defense spending and disproportionally balanced the sequester on the backs of his constituents, was he not giving Tea Party something to take back to their people? When has the Tea Party returned that favor? And would you really want to capitulate to backwoods politicians that insist on cutting spending indiscriminately?I've never been into comparing tragedies. The Tea Party is
almostcomical at this point but what's the point in comparing bad to less-bad?this is not less-bad and bad. It's fucking horrible and something workable.
I couldn't disagree more. Gingrich and Clinton talked multiple times a day during the last furlough. Now? Obama is not a shmoozer and I'm sorry, the President of the United States needs to talk to everyone - including morons - if it means the largest business in the world stays open
As bad as it was for Clinton, I don't think he has ever had to deal with this degree of stupidity. Tea Party types don't negotiate. They simply make demands and vote against anything that is not 100% their way. By the way, this is coming from someone who considered himself more of an Eisenhower Republican.
when the tea partyers first emerged, I didn't vote for them but I thought how the movement sprung up was kind of cool because of how American it is. Now they've just proven to be a bunch of opportunistic morons. I wish Obama would have simply granted individuals a one year waiver from opting into the healthcare exchange - like the tea partyers asked for - just so it looks like they won something. And then when their constituents see how much it helped, everyone opts in and the tea morons don't get re-elected. And all this happens without internationally damaging the credibility of the USA. That last point is why I think Obama deserves criticism
The KKK was also a grassroots movement that sprung up at one point in American history. Needless to say, I wasn't encouraged by the Tea Party just because they became the Tea Party. Today, I personally consider them the greatest treat to American society. They make a strong case for why stupid people and the bulk of people south of the Mason-Dixon line shouldn't vote.
while I think jrod covered this post aptly, I will say that comparing a legal, political group to a domestic terror group sort of degrades your message
not for me. Tea Party may technically be a legal, political group but they are domestic terror group by any other name.
this is why the middle of the country flocks to groups like the tea party. The liberal rhetoric is loud and IMO disrespectful. The tea partyers might be fucking insane but I find your stance so disrespectful that it goes a long way to explaining why the counter-liberal movement has survived and thrived the way it does. I also find it humorous that the democrats haven't figured out a way to beat a bunch of insane fucking morons. It's like how the Knicks always find a way to play down to their competition. Anwyay, fine, I guess the way to deal with the tea party is to continue to treat them as pariahs and they'll continue to do desperate things. Great strategy, democrats!
Why not call a spade a spade? They seem more than ready to do the same from their perspective e.g. "Obama was born in Kenya", "Obama is a socialist hell bent on destroying the country", "Liberals don't love America", etc. The difference is that our reality is actually grounded in reason and fact. Their mentality is nothing new; we have seen it play out throughout history. They are the people that persecute great minds like Copernicus for proposing a heliocentric theory of our solar system. We see it today in the opposition to Global Warming. They are the people that suggested that a man can not hold public office because of his religious affiliation e.g. JFK when he was running for President. We see it today with Obama constantly being accused of being a Muslim. It goes on and on. They are little people, with little minds and ultimately, it's our responsibility to drag them into the future. It really is the only way progress has ever been made.
Call a spade a spade. Yes indeedy. Quite an ironic choice of terms. Your subliminal liberal rhetoric, so quiet and respectful.
So of course, liberal theology brings you the earth as a planet, Copernicus being persecuted for saying so, Global Warming, and we'll throw in a secret love of Catholicism just to throw you conservative religionists a bone. You've got some great facts there.
"We" and "They".
Keep taking names, I'm sure when the powers that be come knocking on your door, you'll be on Obama's personal foundation of determining who's stupid and who's actually worthy of the right to vote.
Yes, liberalism. Bringing you the tremendous facts of abortion, euthanasia and other fine examples of "reason and fact." Tell me, when do "we" start deciding who's actually worthy of life itself? Why stop at voting? Oh wait, you of the "we" are already discussing that, aren't "we"?
Global warming, right. You are really still chewing on Mr. Nobel's hockey stick? Did you buy lots of stock in end of the world Y2K futures?
Keep paying your income taxes. Keep your worldview that Uncle Sam is going to take care of everything for you, because when "we" are in power, everything is being done correctly. Only Harvard grads need apply to positions of power, you idiot conservatives who live on worldviews based on faith or anything other than "our" rational "facts" please get on the train.
Unbelievable.
I'm tempted to respond to your "points" but realize it won't make much of a difference. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'll maintain my position(which is far from the distorted view you're attempting to paint). But since you're the only person that appears to relate to the Tea Party, I'll ask, how can you perceive what they are doing as acceptable?