Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 5/31/2010 11:04:59 PM   
InvisibleBlack


Posts: 865
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
I rest my case.

You`re so above the fray,.....must be pleasant up there.

Lose a family member or know anyone who lost a family member to the neo-con`s adventure in Iraq?


My first thought was to say "Have you lost a family member or know anyone who's lost a family member in Pakistan?" but in either case, the particulars of any given anecdotal incident neither lend nor subtract credence to any argument.

For what it's worth, every male member of my family (myself included) has served in the Armed Forces of the United States of America since my great-grandfather came over from Ireland at the turn of the previous century. This is not to say that we're a "military family" per se, since none of us grew up on military bases or became career military. It was just expected. It's something everyone did. It never really even occured to me that I had the option not to until after I was out. Some saw active combat. Some did not. My father served on a cruiser in the Pacific in WW II. One of my uncles was stationed in Germany during the 50s and so missed Korea and was never in active combat. It's not something that gets discussed, really. I really only find out what each of my relatives did on the rare occasion that something sparks a particular reminiscence. Last year, during his funeral, I found out that one of my uncles was part of the Chosin Reservoir Campaign in Korea since what remained of his unit attended to serve in the honor guard along with the two official representatives of the Armed Forces. I never knew and he never spoke about it.

However, this should make no difference as to validity of my points about the Tea Party or about hypocrisy in American politics. A concept is valid no matter where it comes from. Whether I threw out my selective service card in college or earned the Congressional Medal of Honor is irrelevant to making a point about the political process in America.

[Edit: Actually, while I'm thinking about it: I already stated that I was opposed to the war in Iraq before we went in. How would having a friend or relative die during their service there do anything but further justify my current position on the war!? What exactly are you arguing here? Or are you just blindly attacking me because I said something that conflicts with some other position you hold? If so, I rest my case again.]

< Message edited by InvisibleBlack -- 5/31/2010 11:27:14 PM >

_____________________________

Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 5/31/2010 11:20:45 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

... this thread wasn't about the hypocrisy of both parties - which everyone agrees with - but about the hypocrisy inherent in the platform of the Tea Party, which the followers on this thread do not agree with.


This thread was about whether the ideas expressed by the Tea Party supporters are similar to those of the American Revolutionaries.

Unfortunately, there are some here who have a visceral reaction to even the mention of the Tea Party.  They refuse to use any reason and common sense to view what is actually before them.  Instead they distort and malign.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

If you at all followed the part of this thread that Treasure was involved with, then you would know that domi pointed out on page 2 that the Teas are disingenuous in their outrage of Democratic fiscal irresponsibility when they never protested Republican irrresponsibility re the wars and Bush tax cuts. Treasure tried to deny that there exists an "official" Tea Party platform and asked me to provide sources, which I did. Ironically, the sources I provided contained exactly the same information you posted :

"1) Taxes should not be raised
2) The Federal government has accumulated too much power and needs to be reduced in size and scope
3) Deficits are too large and so the Federal government should spend less "

She ridiculed me, but praised you.


I am sorry if you feel slighted, however I have seen no evidence that you have any room for dispassionate thought.  You, domi and similar ilk don't really appear to want to discuss the issues.  It would seem to be more important to you to be "right" and to slap labels onto people so that you can disenfranchise any who disagree with your bias.

I'm afraid that I have little patience with that type of childish behavior, and no desire to waste my time on people who cannot be bothered to listen and discuss dispassionately.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

... I didn't have a problem with your post except that you walk the fence well and state the obvious in such a way as to not draw ire from either side. You'd make one hell of a politician.


Has it ever occurred to you, BS, that appearing to "walk the fence" can be a result of genuine thought and consideration of all sides.  Some can do that without getting caught up in emotions and knee-jerk reactions.

I don't find that to be a common trait of politicians these days.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 5/31/2010 11:42:58 PM   
brainiacsub


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/11/2007
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		I don't disagree with anything you said except as noted below:
quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

[...] growth in spending is almost an order of magnitude larger under Obama.


Most of the spending which the Teas object to- TARP and stimulus - was in response to unprecedented economic duress and the same advisors who testified in front of Congress that this spending was necessary to prevent a depression are the same ones that would have been advising McCain. Most economists now agree that this was the right thing to do. The other big spending is health care reform, and where the Teas are hypocritical is in not acknowledging that with what we've spent on wars and defense in the past 10 yrs, we could have already paid for health care reform 3 times over. It's a matter of priorities.

quote:


In all honesty, I don't know that the Tea Party is an established political party. I haven't looked into it. Will they be on the ballot in the elections this year? In how many states? Was the "Contract From America" formally adopted by the Tea Party National Convention?

It looks to me like you've got a batch of loosely associated groups thrashing around venting their anger. To paint them all as "hypocrites" is an arguement that can be used against any political party, including Republicans, Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives. That was my point to RML.

I never said the Teas are an official political party and I've even argued in other threads that I don't believe they are even a movement. I agree with the bolded statement above. I use the term Tea Party because that's what they call themselves. I shall go back to using the term teabaggers. But they do have a platform for their anger. You stated it and so did I. I have yet to hear Treasure say what part of the Contract from America she disagrees with. And yes, it was adopted as the official platform in April 2010. Look it up.


quote:

I don't blame Bush or Obama for this, I blame the Paulson/Geithner/Bernake/Summers/Gramm/Rubin/Greenspan crowd. I doubt that either Bush or Obama know enough about economics or finance to make decisions in this area - they get advice and then follow it.

I have made this point myself many times. The problem is that the Conservatives on this site consistently blame Obama, which is why so many of these threads deteriorate to partisan bickering. I have given links to a Frontline special that discusses this very topic yet the teabaggers on this site continue to insist that Obama is a socialist.

quote:

My major problem with the Tea Party is that, as far as I can tell, they're not for anything. They have a batch of things that they're against. Fine. I don't like taxes or a lot of government debt either. I know what you don't want to do. What are your solutions to the drastic problems facing our nation today? That is what you build a movement around. Repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act isn't going to solve the deficit or fix the economy. Neither is lowering taxes.


Once again, I have made this exact point many times. This is exactly the sentiment that the vast majority of the people on this site who disagree with teabaggers support. It's the teabaggers themselves who do not agree with this.



< Message edited by brainiacsub -- 5/31/2010 11:54:06 PM >

(in reply to InvisibleBlack)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 12:12:02 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

... I shall go back to using the term teabaggers. ...

... which is why so many of these threads deteriorate to partisan bickering. teabaggers ...

teabaggers ...  teabaggers


So, you are so above the partisan bickering, are you?

It's not your fault that threads deteriorate into partisan bickering, huh?

*sheesh*


quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

... it was adopted as the official platform in April 2010. Look it up.


Are you really that ignorant?

You mean the Nashville gathering?

Was that the same party convention to which all the subordinate caucuses and precincts elected delegates to represent them at the National Convention?

And then, based on their National Charter (which all members must ascribe to, in order to be members of "The TEA Party") these representative delegates got together, (as long as their party dues were current) and then voted on a party platform that is binding on all subordinate parts of "The Party", in order to take them into the National Elections?

Has the voting continued on the "Contract from America"?  How can that be, if it was "officially adopted" at the "convention"?

Which member was chosen as the Presidential candidate?  Who are their slate of candidates for Congressional office?

Who was elected as the National Party Chair?  What's his/her salary, and where is their office?

Did the committee on national fund-raising give a report?  How much is in the treasury of "The TEA Party"?

In how many states is this Nashville, conventional-based "TEA Party" currently registered in, so that their candidates can get matching Federal funds, and field a Presidential candidate? 

Have they registered with the Federal Election Commission?

Catching the drift here, yet?

(There's a clue, flying by ... catch it!)

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 12:23:16 AM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

It looks to me like you've got a batch of loosely associated groups thrashing around venting their anger.


I never said the Teas are an official political party and I've even argued in other threads that I don't believe they are even a movement. I agree with the bolded statement above. I use the term Tea Party because that's what they call themselves. I shall go back to using the term teabaggers. But they do have a platform for their anger. You stated it and so did I. I have yet to hear Treasure say what part of the Contract from America she disagrees with. And yes, it was adopted as the official platform in April 2010. Look it up.


The Tea Party isn't an official party or even a movement.... yet they have an official platform?

How can you even begin to think that this makes sense?

And sheesh, woman... if you are really interested in my opinion on the "Contract From America", instead of whining about it to a third party why don't you simply ask? 

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 4:23:37 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

The Tea Party isn't an official party or even a movement.

Hard to imagine why anyone would take them seriously.


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY


Unfortunately, this will fall on deaf ears. Reason isn't very popular to some here. It takes the fun out of ridicule, don't you know.


Says one of the main culprits.

domi, I was thinking that too.



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 6/1/2010 4:26:05 AM >

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 5:39:00 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		Firm....IB is an idiot......And you are being disingenuous as well.

For example....While Pakistan is an "ally" we do know that al qeada members are going back and forth across the Pakistani border. American troops are not allowed to step into Pakistan without prior approval. Apparently drones are the only approach to have any impact on deterring or killing these combatants.

Is it a practice that should be stopped based upon the results? Of course. Why has it not received the critical treatment? Probably because American lives are not being exhausted in this pursuit. Does that make it a worthwhile venture? No, it does not.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20100601/890/twl-al-qaeda-number-three-killed-on-afgh.html
"Al Qaeda number three killed on Afghan-Pakistan border

Tue, Jun 1 10:31 AM
Washington, June 1 (DPA) A senior figure in the Al Qaeda terror network has been killed in Pakistan's border area with Afghanistan, a media report said.

An unnamed US official said Mustafa Abu al-Yazid was killed in a drone airstrike last week, the US broadcaster MSNBC reported late Monday.

A statement purporting to come from the terrorist group appeared on Islamist websites confirming the death but gave no details of the circumstances..


Unlike you, I look at this story with incredible skepticism...Why would Al Qaeda announce his death? This is also right on the heels of civilians being killed in a drone attack.

If this were during the Bsh years you would simply embrace this story, due to you not possessing the capability to question anything told to you by your handlers.

Now lets move over to Iraq. Thousands of soldiers killed ad tens of thousands wounded to engage in a war started under false pretenses. We were told that Saddam played a part and had a hand in 9-11. Which turned out to be a lie or false information.


So to compare the drone attacks to the war in Iraq is just more drivel spewed out by folks that are incredibly uneducated or someone attempting to make an analogy where none exists. One is a pursuit on enemy combatants the other was whatever in the fuck it was.


Now I believe you might be smart enough to understand this....Treasure probably not.

Now if you want to continue please bring more to the table. Than a bunch of bullshit and a treasure of fools gold.


But this is a thread about the tea party.

If one is able to find the sites to retrieve the amount of federal debt owed they are also intelligent enough to find the sites to explain where and how this increase in Federal debt arose.

Much of the increase has stemmed from the continuing of Bush policies....The bail out, the war, which is hopefully coming to an end, at least in Iraq.


You guys better strike while the iron is hot because the debt is not going to stay at this level.

Then the old, conservative white people will have to focus on some other aspect of the Democrat's administration to attack.


_____________________________



(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 5:47:57 AM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Why is it that the same people who were 100% behind Bush and the Iraq War, which has cost us far more than any social program, are now for fiscal conservatism when they supported financing a needless war?


Because many people simply take on the opinion they are told to take on by someone they regard as "credible". Because many people are solely politically motivated and so have no overall "ideology" or "value set" to adhere to. This isn't limited to the neo-cons or the Tea Party. It's across the board. Hypocrisy knows know political affiliation.

Why were people so opposed to the invasion of Iraq and so involved in the "anti-war" movement when it was Bush doing it, but giving Obama a pass on illegal attacks in Pakistan, on use of unmanned drone weaponry on civilian targets, on renditioning of prisoners, etc. etc. etc? Because it's not in their political interest to do so. Why was Cindy Sheehan a heroine for protesting Bush but a "nut" when she protests Obama? Why were some people upset when Obama used snipers in a rescue mission against the Somali pirates but would have cheered if Bush had done so? Why weren't right-wingers cheering when Clinton reformed welfare?

The mindset of "my side can do no wrong" and "their side is evil no matter what" is a sad fact of life.



While I would agree with you in general, I think you are mistaking the sentiment against the Iraq War for an overall anti-war movement.

You will find many people who supported Bush's decision to invade Afghanistan but were against invading Iraq.

As far as the Predator strikes, they were initiated under Bush and continued by Obama, with what seems to be the tacit approval of the Pakistan government.



(in reply to InvisibleBlack)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 5:56:10 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
I rest my case.

You`re so above the fray,.....must be pleasant up there.

Lose a family member or know anyone who lost a family member to the neo-con`s adventure in Iraq?


My first thought was to say "Have you lost a family member or know anyone who's lost a family member in Pakistan?" but in either case, the particulars of any given anecdotal incident neither lend nor subtract credence to any argument.

For what it's worth, every male member of my family (myself included) has served in the Armed Forces of the United States of America since my great-grandfather came over from Ireland at the turn of the previous century. This is not to say that we're a "military family" per se, since none of us grew up on military bases or became career military. It was just expected. It's something everyone did. It never really even occured to me that I had the option not to until after I was out. Some saw active combat. Some did not. My father served on a cruiser in the Pacific in WW II. One of my uncles was stationed in Germany during the 50s and so missed Korea and was never in active combat. It's not something that gets discussed, really. I really only find out what each of my relatives did on the rare occasion that something sparks a particular reminiscence. Last year, during his funeral, I found out that one of my uncles was part of the Chosin Reservoir Campaign in Korea since what remained of his unit attended to serve in the honor guard along with the two official representatives of the Armed Forces. I never knew and he never spoke about it.

However, this should make no difference as to validity of my points about the Tea Party or about hypocrisy in American politics. A concept is valid no matter where it comes from. Whether I threw out my selective service card in college or earned the Congressional Medal of Honor is irrelevant to making a point about the political process in America.

[Edit: Actually, while I'm thinking about it: I already stated that I was opposed to the war in Iraq before we went in. How would having a friend or relative die during their service there do anything but further justify my current position on the war!? What exactly are you arguing here? Or are you just blindly attacking me because I said something that conflicts with some other position you hold? If so, I rest my case again.]




'blindly attacking"?

I rest my case.

The war on the Afghan-Pakistan boarder is legit.

Your long winded attempts to say otherwise are baloney.

Your moral comparisons are simplistic and self serving.They are not based in fact.

And Obama is no bush.


< Message edited by Owner59 -- 6/1/2010 6:09:56 AM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to InvisibleBlack)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 7:17:15 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

The war on the Afghan-Pakistan boarder is legit.

You are parsing (changing) the facts.

Our drone attacks are inside Pakistan, not simply "on the border".

Civilians are being killed, along with AQ targets.

But, according to your reasoning, attacking the Iraqi military was illegitimate. Despite Congressional approval to do so. 

But attacking inside an allied nation which has specifically told us it did not approve of us doing so (and killing civilians), is legitimate?


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
Your long winded attempts to say otherwise are baloney.

uhhh ... such an outstanding example of deflection from, and ignorance of facts is really quite breathtaking, Owner.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
Your moral comparisons are simplistic and self serving.They are not based in fact.


Where's that mirror .... ? 

Firm

PS. Do not mistake me.  I've no problems with the drone attacks inside Pakistan, and I have no illusions about the moral and legal implications of those attacks.

I simply find your ability to rationalize things to the benefit of your ideological side stunning,


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 7:36:12 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		They are in the boarder region, which is more vertical than flat.

Care to go there and mark the boarder line,.....brave guy?

And I thought you supported the war on terror.

Sorry for my mistake.

I couldn`t care less where the assholes are.They could be in your fucking lap and I`d push the button.




_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:01:32 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

They are in the boarder region, which is more vertical than flat.

Care to go there and mark the boarder line,.....brave guy?

And I thought you supported the war on terror.

Sorry for my mistake.

I couldn`t care less where the assholes are.They could be in your fucking lap and I`d push the button.





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2G3wGVAnlQ&feature=player_embedded#!  here -  she is taking the country back.  lol


(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:13:08 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

They are in the boarder region, which is more vertical than flat.


Map of Drone Attacks in Pakistan

So, by checking out the scale of the map, I see drone attacks at least 40 miles into Pakistan.

Regardless of how vertical the area is, that's into the recognized borders of an allied nation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Care to go there and mark the boarder line,.....brave guy?

It seems that you are attempting a version of the "chickenhawk" argument.

Sorry, even if I honored that argument, it wouldn't apply to me.

I've been shot at, and have engaged enemy forces in combat.  If I were younger, and that was still my orders, I'd do as required.

I've also got a son who earned his Purple Heart under the orders of his nation, in combat.  Treasure has a son about to deploy to Afghanistan.

Please peddle your attempts at moral cowardice and moral intimidation elsewhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

And I thought you supported the war on terror.

Sorry for my mistake.

What "war on terror"?

You mean "Overseas Contingency Operations"?

No ... wait ... right now its "CVE" -- Countering Violent Extremism"

Whatever you want to call it, it's obvious you failed to read my "PS" in my last post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

I couldn`t care less where the assholes are.They could be in your fucking lap and I`d push the button.

What!??!

No care for innocent civilians?  "Collateral damage" doesn't mean moral degeneracy?

I'm ashamed that you have fallen so far from your liberal roots, Owner! 

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:23:48 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		http://www.newsoxy.com/world/glenn-beck-and-malia-obama-13238.html

Host Glenn Beck and Malia Obama

Published: May 30, 2010

Glenn Beck and Malia Obama joke was unacceptable. Beck apologized to President Obama and one of his daughters, Milia, shortly after the his radio show on Fox. He revealed a lot of guilt for bringing a young family member into his political debate......

.......During the news conference, the president said Malia had asked him "Daddy? Daddy? Daddy, did you plug the hole yet?" The Fox host, along with his co-host Pat Gray, responded by imitating what the conversation was like. Beck imitated the daughter by asking the question, Gray responded, "Honey, not yet... Not time yet, honey. Hasn't done enough damage," Gray said.

Later in the segment, Glenn Beck turned the routine toward race. "Why do you hate black people so much?" he said, still imitating in a child's voice. "I'm part white, honey," Gray responded in the voice of the president. It's uncertain if Fox asked him to make the apology or not.


This is the same Glenn Beck that is highlighted in Sanity's "Don't tread on us." signature?

"Don't tread on us" = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL5bPJFHRnA&feature=player_embedded


Now we know that there are no spokesperson for the teabaggers ( lol)....But why does it seem that damn near every spokesperson that happens to open their mouth in support of the teabagger "movement" is a racist cocksucking dick?


It can't be because it represents the ideology of the people that calling themselves teabaggers, could it?

No one is showing much outrage at Glenny or any other of the fucks that routinely do this type of shit.

It's only because you secretly agree with them.

< Message edited by domiguy -- 6/1/2010 8:25:28 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:30:42 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Firm....IB is an idiot......And you are being disingenuous as well.

I respectfully disagree with both points.


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

For example....While Pakistan is an "ally" we do know that al qeada members are going back and forth across the Pakistani border. American troops are not allowed to step into Pakistan without prior approval. Apparently drones are the only approach to have any impact on deterring or killing these combatants.

...

If this were during the Bsh years you would simply embrace this story, due to you not possessing the capability to question anything told to you by your handlers.

Now lets move over to Iraq. Thousands of soldiers killed ad tens of thousands wounded to engage in a war started under false pretenses. We were told that Saddam played a part and had a hand in 9-11. Which turned out to be a lie or false information.

So to compare the drone attacks to the war in Iraq is just more drivel spewed out by folks that are incredibly uneducated or someone attempting to make an analogy where none exists. One is a pursuit on enemy combatants the other was whatever in the fuck it was.

Enough for a couple of more threads.  So I'll not respond here to these points.


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Now I believe you might be smart enough to understand this....Treasure probably not.

Gratuitously insulting Treasure may make you feel like you are a tough guy.  However, it tends to support an argument of the opposite conclusion.



quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

But this is a thread about the tea party.

Agreed.


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

If one is able to find the sites to retrieve the amount of federal debt owed they are also intelligent enough to find the sites to explain where and how this increase in Federal debt arose.

Much of the increase has stemmed from the continuing of Bush policies....The bail out, the war, which is hopefully coming to an end, at least in Iraq.

For the moment, accepting your predicates ... wasn't Obama elected for "change"?,  Not to embrace, continue and deepen Bush's policies?

So how come it's ok to castigate Bush admin for opening the gates, but not ok to castigate the Obama admin for widening the gates?


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

... t because the debt is not going to stay at this level.

I think that is the TEA partiers concern.



quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Then the old, conservative white people will have to focus on some other aspect of the Democrat's administration to attack.

Isn't this a racist remark?

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:32:32 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		Would anyone like a glass of water?


lol

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:37:00 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		If treasure wants to participate out here, then she might want to answer those who question her methodology.

She tends not to answer those that question her posts. I don't think these are gratuitous insults but rather accurate statements based upon her posting history.

If she chooses to participate she has to be up to being called in on the carpet when she is less then genuine in her motives and actions.


Go back and read the thread....She mentions the FDIC. Not exactly the way to further an argument. She doesn't answer the hard questions presented to her but rather attacks or deflects the question altogether.

My statement stands.


Time to make the dollars to help pay off the debt.

_____________________________



(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 8:55:08 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

They are in the boarder region, which is more vertical than flat.

Care to go there and mark the boarder line,.....brave guy?

And I thought you supported the war on terror.

Sorry for my mistake.

I couldn`t care less where the assholes are.They could be in your fucking lap and I`d push the button.





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2G3wGVAnlQ&feature=player_embedded#!  here -  she is taking the country back.  lol




Hopscotch on sidewalks,kites in the air ,family drives on Sundays,blue ribbons at ~STATE~ fares........

Obviously these tea-baggers worship the ~STATE~.........



And could the tea-baggers tell us How Obama took away hopscotch on sidewalks,kite in the air ,family drives on Sunday,blue ribbons at state fares?

Or are those code words for the fringies?

Why did she leave out baseball,hot dogs apple pie and Chevrolet?Could it be that Obama saved GM from extinction?


< Message edited by Owner59 -- 6/1/2010 8:57:38 AM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 9:25:23 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		Hokey- that song...  but at least the old folks got out of the home for the day?

HAAAAAA!  lol

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party - 6/1/2010 9:30:45 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59


Hopscotch on sidewalks,kites in the air ,family drives on Sundays,blue ribbons at ~STATE~ fares........

Obviously these tea-baggers worship the ~STATE~.........



And could the tea-baggers tell us How Obama took away hopscotch on sidewalks,kite in the air ,family drives on Sunday,blue ribbons at state fares?

Or are those code words for the fringies?

Why did she leave out baseball,hot dogs apple pie and Chevrolet?Could it be that Obama saved GM from extinction?



The refrain is "... and your Senator is not bought."

Sounds like a reasonable request to me.  You disagree?

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A Historical Take on the Tea Party Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109