If the tea party wins, America Loses

inmytree

this is scary... :crazy:

Top Six Established Laws That Tea Partiers Claim Are Unconstitutional



http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010 ... hp?ref=fpb

gimmesometruth27

inmytree wrote:

this is scary... :crazy:

Top Six Established Laws That Tea Partiers Claim Are Unconstitutional



http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010 ... hp?ref=fpb

where is the batshit crazy emoticon??

mysticweed

Godfather. wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

you can list a million contradictions about the tea partiers and it doesn't mean a damm thing ... most tea partiers are followers of an ideology based on a simple presumption:

the current gov't is screwing you and you need to take it back ... the strategy is quite brilliant ... you can tell people that they will pay zero taxes and still have everything and they will buy it ... because for the most part, most of these people lack the will to actually put those concepts to any kind of test ...

it's so easy to rally up minions when times are tough ...

it's been this way for years,if someone slings enough mud eventually some of it will stick by some peoples standards, BTW I agree with you.
it's ez to blame obama bush reagen and who ever else but It takes more than one person to screw things up
especially as bad as they have been in the last several decades, our entire government needs a douche.
just my opinion.

douche rinse repeat
how do you tell when a politician is lying, their fucking lips are moving
but none in my adult lifetime have wreaked the havoc in every way possible
as the bush-cheney administration
those that think obama has not done well seem to forget what a shit-pile of shit he inherited.

inmytree

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

inmytree wrote:

this is scary... :crazy:

Top Six Established Laws That Tea Partiers Claim Are Unconstitutional



http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010 ... hp?ref=fpb

where is the batshit crazy emoticon??

when replying, look under the smiles and you'll see: View more smiles.... :thumbup:

gimmesometruth27

inmytree wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

inmytree wrote:

this is scary... :crazy:

Top Six Established Laws That Tea Partiers Claim Are Unconstitutional



http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010 ... hp?ref=fpb

where is the batshit crazy emoticon??

when replying, look under the smiles and you'll see: View more smiles.... :thumbup:

thanks lol... :wave:

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

great video of a special comment from olbermann from this week. i know a lot of you will laugh at this, especially those of you who support the tea party, but he raises some excellent points and cites most of the quotes. it is nearly 20 minutes long, but i thought it was a nice piece. some of these people running for office are extremists and hypocrites. it gets really good at about the 14:48 mark....it clearly shows the important choice that we have to make in four days, and i think the right choice is pretty obvious....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/2 ... 75170.html

I watched it. I had this wonderful reply with quotes and all sorts of stuff written out, and then because of internet explorer I clicked on submit and it takes me to the log in screen and my post is gone. Anyway...feel bad for me.

Olbermann is one of the poster boys for why I left the democratic party behind. Believe it or not, when I was a younger man, up until very recently I was a pretty stanch democrat. Funny how when you lose a lot of what is important to you, and have to fight and claw to get everything back you have a change in philosophy.
While he raises good points about "tea party" candidates, he also creates a very condescending opinion piece rife with hyperbole. Does he honestly think anyone running for office wants to turn back time and hang union bosses and envoke jim crow laws. Get the fuck out of here with that shit.
The criticism I can do with out is calling people hypocrite for using medicaid if you think it shouldn't be there, for using social security if you disagree with it as a policy. It is no more hypocritical to do that than it is to be wealthy and only pay what you have to in taxes while saying the rich need to pay more.
Also, at the 15-16 minute mark when he talks about convincing one SANE voter they need to vote democrat is asinine. People who believe in a smaller federal government are not insane and it is that kind of stuff that makes people hate olbermann. It is the same thing that liberals think of beck and limbaugh, it is constant hyperbole and it is obnoxious.
It is too bad, because I like the depth to which the piece goes in trying to unearth things about political candidates. All stones should be unturned on ALL CANDIDATES.

My favorite bit of hyperbole was how he says that republicans and tea partiers want to make it safe for bernie madoff and that they have "energized the greedy the self serving and the misinformed." he can fuck off

gimme, is this piece what you think about all conservative thinkers?

gimmesometruth27

mikepegg44 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

great video of a special comment from olbermann from this week. i know a lot of you will laugh at this, especially those of you who support the tea party, but he raises some excellent points and cites most of the quotes. it is nearly 20 minutes long, but i thought it was a nice piece. some of these people running for office are extremists and hypocrites. it gets really good at about the 14:48 mark....it clearly shows the important choice that we have to make in four days, and i think the right choice is pretty obvious....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/2 ... 75170.html

I watched it. I had this wonderful reply with quotes and all sorts of stuff written out, and then because of internet explorer I clicked on submit and it takes me to the log in screen and my post is gone. Anyway...feel bad for me.

Olbermann is one of the poster boys for why I left the democratic party behind. Believe it or not, when I was a younger man, up until very recently I was a pretty stanch democrat. Funny how when you lose a lot of what is important to you, and have to fight and claw to get everything back you have a change in philosophy.
While he raises good points about "tea party" candidates, he also creates a very condescending opinion piece rife with hyperbole. Does he honestly think anyone running for office wants to turn back time and hang union bosses and envoke jim crow laws. Get the fuck out of here with that shit.
The criticism I can do with out is calling people hypocrite for using medicaid if you think it shouldn't be there, for using social security if you disagree with it as a policy. It is no more hypocritical to do that than it is to be wealthy and only pay what you have to in taxes while saying the rich need to pay more.
Also, at the 15-16 minute mark when he talks about convincing one SANE voter they need to vote democrat is asinine. People who believe in a smaller federal government are not insane and it is that kind of stuff that makes people hate olbermann. It is the same thing that liberals think of beck and limbaugh, it is constant hyperbole and it is obnoxious.
It is too bad, because I like the depth to which the piece goes in trying to unearth things about political candidates. All stones should be unturned on ALL CANDIDATES.

My favorite bit of hyperbole was how he says that republicans and tea partiers want to make it safe for bernie madoff and that they have "energized the greedy the self serving and the misinformed." he can fuck off

gimme, is this piece what you think about all conservative thinkers?

it is no more hyperbole than what beck and hanity and o'reilly spout every day. and i said in my post he is a blowhard. but i agree with the smugness because i think it would he a huge mistake to elect these people. if we do we will be going back to the ame things from the previous administration. i have not heard a concrete plan from any of these people other than "undoing what obama has done" and saying "no" to everything. it is easy to be the party of opposition, any two year old can say the word "no". that is all they say, tea party candidates and 2 year olds, all they say is "no". i completely disagree with the notion of doing away with a lot of the organizations and offices of government they want to get rid of. and you can refer to the video for the long laundry list of those.

this piece is not what i think of all conservative thinkers. i have great respect for some of the ideas on the conservative side and i hae respect for ron paul but his ideas would never ever work in this country. there are not enough people that would want a libertarian society. this piece however, t is a good representation of what i think about a lot of the tea party candidates, bachman, angle, rubio, palin, et al.

Smellyman

i don'tlike Keith O. He is smug and sometimes uses too big of words for me.

Unlike Hannity, Beck and O Reily et al..., Keith O uses a little thing called facts in his commentary. Something the others should try someday.

gimmesometruth27

Smellyman wrote:

i don'tlike Keith O. He is smug and sometimes uses too big of words for me.

Unlike Hannity, Beck and O Reily et al..., Keith O uses a little thing called facts in his commentary. Something the others should try someday.

but if those people used facts, they will probably lose their audience because things are not as bad as what beck et al says it is...

unsung

I'll take my chances getting away from the same agenda the last 10 or so years.

If they continue this pattern vote them out too.

kenny olav

Well... thanks for posting the video. Olbermann made some good points, but I immediately busted out laughing at the end of it - it's that blustered, angry look on his face - gets me every time

Some of his points were overblown too.... kinda gives the Tea Partiers some ammunition when you take things like "the Tea Party would support Bernie Madoff" out of context.

satansbed

cincybearcat wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

the strategy is quite brilliant ... you can tell people that they will pay zero taxes and still have everything and they will buy it ... because for the most part, most of these people lack the will to actually put those concepts to any kind of test ...

Just like the liberal concept of telling people they can have everything for free and only the "Rich" will have to pay for it. It is brilliant.

Both sides try to have their cake and eat it to. The funny thing is all of them only care about 3 things...money and power...and to get that they only care about 1 thing...getting votes. Most don't really care about the people, they only care about what they can sell them in order to keep their power and thus keep their $.

We need a wholesale changover.

thats not the liberal view, that is a left wing few, you can be right wing and liberal or centerist and liberal or left wing and liberal, the same you you can be leftwing and autocratic, right wing and auto cratic and center and autocratic, liberal and right wing are not polar opisates

bgivens33

cajunkiwi wrote:

Okay - here's one of the big questions I have about the Tea Party philosophy and the candidates the party has chosen to endorse:

What makes you think these people will be any better than the incumbents?

Two years ago the right was complaining that Obama lacked the necessary qualifications to be president; that he was too young and inexperienced. Now, two years later, there's a movement afoot to oust incumbent politicians and replace them with people like Meg Whitman (no political experience and allegedly knowingly employed an illegal immigrant), Christine O'Donnell (a former marketing consultant who has never held office anywhere, has been accused of misusing campaign funds and lying about her educational background, and apparently doesn't know what the First Amendment covers), and Sharron Angle (has political experience, but this year alone has alleged that Dearborn, Michigan, is under Sharia law, has said Mexicans in a campaign ad about illegal immigration are meant to represent Canadians, and called herself Nevada's first Asian politician).

I understand that some people are disappointed in incumbent politicians - but is the answer ousting them and replacing with people who have no experience and are borderline nuts? It seems like all you're doing is making a bad situation worse.

I think this is a valid question...

I think you first need to make a distinction between the President and congressional/gubernatorial seats. I don't think it's really fair to compare the two when it comes to experience. One is the leader of our country and the others are cogs in a machine or the leader of one of fifty states.

And I wouldn't lump every conservative into the same pile either. McCain lost my vote because I was terrified that Palin might become president. I think the presidential election would have been closer if he either chose someone else, or was in better health.

The tea party itself is a pretty interesting 'movement'. To no surprise it really has been hijacked by republicans and the original tea party didn't have enough leadership to stop it. And if your a high up republican, why wouldn't you? It's the perfect platform to tie yourself too. This complemented by Pres. Obama's declining approval rating makes for the perfect storm.

I think a lot of the Tea Party cliche's are being ate up by republican's because they speak to what these people want. The real debate comes in with whether or not they are feasible.

Olberman's piece was extremely one-sided, as expected. I was more interested in hearing some of his responses to what the candidates' ideas, instead of spinning them so they sound rash.

For instance, when he talks about Miller wanting to "change the constitution, he wants to repeal the 17th amendment".

When the 17th amendment was passed, it was changing the constitution. I think it's completely valid to want to repeal an amendment if you feel it isn't applicable anymore or it was a mistake. Olberman just decided to focus on him wanting to 'change' the constitution.

His rant was pretty unsubstantial and littered with insults. He always reminds me of the liberal version of O'Reily.

bgivens33

And one other thing that has become annoying re: Tea Party...

Yada yada is "unconstitutional because it doesn't allow for it"

The constitution doesn't spell out everything the government can do, it spells out what it can't.
If you feel like something is unconstitutional, point to a specific passage(or ruling) where it says it is prohibited... don't say it never says you can.

Electric_Delta

There are fringe elements in every party.

How is that newsworthy?

Nevermind...ready the Pulitzer.