I will be there taking pictures of the wildlife.
http://www.americantowns.com/fl/jacksonville/events/first-coast-tax-day-tea-party
date:Thursday, April 15, 2010 time:5:30 PM venue:Jacksonville Landing address:2 Independent Drive Jacksonville, FL 32099 View map
Time: 5:30 p.m/8:00 p.m.
Find more information on our website: http://www.firstcoastteaparty.ning.com
Contact: Billie Tucker (904) 910-5024
oh and...
http://teabonics.com/
Someone gonna make some sweet tea?
Quote from: stephendare on April 14, 2010, 06:54:55 PM
Quote from: JC on April 14, 2010, 06:43:23 PM
I will be there taking pictures of the wildlife.
http://www.americantowns.com/fl/jacksonville/events/first-coast-tax-day-tea-party
date:Thursday, April 15, 2010 time:5:30 PM venue:Jacksonville Landing address:2 Independent Drive Jacksonville, FL 32099 View map
Time: 5:30 p.m/8:00 p.m.
Find more information on our website: http://www.firstcoastteaparty.ning.com
Contact: Billie Tucker (904) 910-5024
Hopefully Notnow and BT will be out before hand with a spell checker.
You know Billie Tucker?
So who's representing British?
Forget the MetroJax PubCrawl...I'm all about the Tea Party!
Puffery.
Quote from: stephendare on April 14, 2010, 06:58:03 PM
Bridge Troll
Funny coincidence!
Quote from: Bostech on April 14, 2010, 09:02:01 PM
So who's representing British?
I guess I can, if no one else will.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 14, 2010, 09:41:55 PM
Forget the MetroJax PubCrawl...I'm all about the Tea Party!
I am really only going to take photos. I think as the rage builds these events are going to become more volatile and I want my Pulitzer before 40!
Once again..puffery ::)
Forget the Tea Party, have a Wine Party with 1040FU wine!
http://www.1040fu.com/ (http://www.1040fu.com/)
QuoteHopefully Notnow and BT will be out before hand with a spell checker.
Never been to... and not part of the movement and your attempt to identify me with this group is pretty silly... Even more silly is your attempt to use a few spelling errors to identify them as a group while ignoring the same type of errors from protesters of other groups. ::) :)
I will be in attendance with a few well placed but poorly spelled and conjugated signs to help perpetuate the myth.
I'm here to help, folks.
Progressivism is safe in my hands!
I may stop by to observe the mob. I hope I'll be able to get a table at Hooters afterward, or Mavericks won't be 1 in 1 out.
QuoteI see that your own quotes on the spelling errors of the libruls have been erased,
I have erased nothing... Have you?
I think I like seeing the misspelled signs because of their silly juxtaposition with the seriousness of their position. Its an interesting contrast and it makes me laugh!
The sign spelling "jokes", to put that term as loosely as possible, are really getting rather annoying. I understand the disagreement with the message, but to continually deride these people reflects rather poorly on yourselves. They are citizens of this country just like you are. They are concerned about their nation, just as I am sure you are. They have at least taken enough time out of their lives to turn off the TV, make a crude sign and try to get involved. That's a heck of a lot more than can be said for most. You can totally disagree with their message and you can believe their being misguided is a result of their being uninformed or incapable of grasping the issues. To paint the tea parties in that light I also believe to be enormously broad and untrue, but even that would not motivate me to post this.
But the transparent holier than thou patting yourself on the back you engage in by relentlessly making fun of these people annoys me and makes me less inclined to value anything else you have to say. Sorry, but I had to say it.
Quote from: buckethead on April 15, 2010, 07:54:27 AM
I will be in attendance with a few well placed but poorly spelled and conjugated signs to help perpetuate the myth.
I'm here to help, folks.
Progressivism is safe in my hands!
So will I!
maybe
Quote from: Tripoli1711 on April 15, 2010, 10:07:27 AM
The sign spelling "jokes", to put that term as loosely as possible, are really getting rather annoying. I understand the disagreement with the message, but to continually deride these people reflects rather poorly on yourselves. They are citizens of this country just like you are. They are concerned about their nation, just as I am sure you are. They have at least taken enough time out of their lives to turn off the TV, make a crude sign and try to get involved. That's a heck of a lot more than can be said for most. You can totally disagree with their message and you can believe their being misguided is a result of their being uninformed or incapable of grasping the issues. To paint the tea parties in that light I also believe to be enormously broad and untrue, but even that would not motivate me to post this.
But the transparent holier than thou patting yourself on the back you engage in by relentlessly making fun of these people annoys me and makes me less inclined to value anything else you have to say. Sorry, but I had to say it.
If you are not yet putting less value on what I have to say, here is some food for thought.
Many, many, many of these people who engage in the Tea Parties are doing so out of fear, which leads to anger all brought forth by propaganda filled with lies and half truths. Now, if you don't see a problem with that you should look back through history and you can see examples of other movements built from fear, anger and propaganda. A misinformed, scared, angry mob is potentially dangerous and is extremely unpredictable.
Oddly, I agree with a lot they have to say, being a half liberal, half libertarian(ish) person. But if someone holds a sign calling Obama a socialist, or a Nazi, they are fair game in my book. So whatever, be annoyed and don't value anything else I have to say. But seriously, how difficult is it to spell check your sign before you write it? My spelling is honestly not all that great either, but my little web browser tells me when I have spelled something wrong, and, as to not allow my misspelled words to act as a distraction from my argument, I make damn sure I fix them!
QuoteMany, many, many of these people who engage in the Tea Parties are doing so out of fear, which leads to anger all brought forth by propaganda filled with lies and half truths.
They must be proud... being the only group to ever be possibly influenced by such tripe!! :D ::)
QuoteBut if someone holds a sign calling Obama Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld or... etc etc etc...a socialist, or a Nazi, they are fair game in my book.
Cmon JC... do you hear yourself? :)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 11:00:51 AM
QuoteMany, many, many of these people who engage in the Tea Parties are doing so out of fear, which leads to anger all brought forth by propaganda filled with lies and half truths.
They must be proud... being the only group to ever be possibly influenced by such tripe!! :D ::)
QuoteBut if someone holds a sign calling Obama Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld or... etc etc etc...a socialist, or a Nazi, they are fair game in my book.
Cmon JC... do you hear yourself? :)
Engaging in this will only lead to a spiraling argument that will not ever end. Clearly we see things differently, although I cant remember ever seeing anyone call anyone in the BA a socialist I can say I dont approve of calling them Nazis. These labels create false arguments and are a distraction from the actual debates on topics like; the illegal wars, trampling habeas corpus, war profiteering and so on. On the other hand, legitimate arguments can be made about Obama carrying on Bush era spying, prisons, wars, forcing people to pay for health insurance and so forth. But calling someone a Nazi is just childish, because it is a complete departure from any discussion with substance because to discuss with that individual you must first convince them that said individual is not Nazi and who wants to start an argument on such a stupid premise? I would also like someone to explain to me how Obama is a socialist, seriously, I will start another thread because I want to know.
Stephen-
I never made such comments because I wasn't around at the time and/or I wouldn't choose to disagree with a position in that fashion. In any event, if it is comeuppance for those previous posters I believe there is a better way to call them out on their hypocrisy than constant condescension aimed at people who may deserve no comeuppance...
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 11:23:37 AM
I do think these people are uneducated boobs with seditious tendencies.
I fear those same individuals who are accusing others of sedition are guilty themselves, given the ambiguity surrounding the word and the genuine arguments around who the constitution is supposed to protect.
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 11:33:12 AM
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 11:31:25 AM
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 11:23:37 AM
I do think these people are uneducated boobs with seditious tendencies.
I fear those same individuals who are accusing others of sedition are guilty themselves, given the ambiguity surrounding the word and the genuine arguments around who the constitution is supposed to protect.
Do you think I am seditious, JC?
No, because I feel that sedition is a tool used by authority to quell dissent. I have no authority for you to question so I have no reason to accuse you of sedition. I was aiming my comment at those in the media and elected officials.
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 11:36:01 AM
Pop Quiz. Did your Taxes go up or down this year?
Yes, misinformed and misguided!
QuoteEngaging in this will only lead to a spiraling argument that will not ever end. Clearly we see things differently, although I cant remember ever seeing anyone call anyone in the BA a socialist I can say I dont approve of calling them Nazis. These labels create false arguments and are a distraction from the actual debates on topics like; the illegal wars, trampling habeas corpus, war profiteering and so on. On the other hand, legitimate arguments can be made about Obama carrying on Bush era spying, prisons, wars, forcing people to pay for health insurance and so forth. But calling someone a Nazi is just childish, because it is a complete departure from any discussion with substance because to discuss with that individual you must first convince them that said individual is not Nazi and who wants to start an argument on such a stupid premise? I would also like someone to explain to me how Obama is a socialist, seriously, I will start another thread because I want to know.
I agree JC. My point... and the point of others here... is that while this particular group is the one holding mis spelled signs and calling the current president names... we only have to go back but a few years to see other groups doing the same. Discounting, ignoring or deriding them was a mistake in the past and it is true now.
Stephen thinks it is fair to say that "a large number of them are racist and racistly motivated." While I am sure that some of them are... I do not think his statement is true. Stephen thinks most are "jackasses"... probably not true either. They are definitely from another spectrum of politics than he adheres to but that certainly does not make them racist, jackasses, nor serial mis-spellers.
They are every day middle class folk who are concerned about the direction of their country.
Let me say again... I do not identify with, nor participate in, the Tea Party movement. They do however need to be heard and their concerns addressed... from both republicans and democrats.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 12:12:05 PM
QuoteEngaging in this will only lead to a spiraling argument that will not ever end. Clearly we see things differently, although I cant remember ever seeing anyone call anyone in the BA a socialist I can say I dont approve of calling them Nazis. These labels create false arguments and are a distraction from the actual debates on topics like; the illegal wars, trampling habeas corpus, war profiteering and so on. On the other hand, legitimate arguments can be made about Obama carrying on Bush era spying, prisons, wars, forcing people to pay for health insurance and so forth. But calling someone a Nazi is just childish, because it is a complete departure from any discussion with substance because to discuss with that individual you must first convince them that said individual is not Nazi and who wants to start an argument on such a stupid premise? I would also like someone to explain to me how Obama is a socialist, seriously, I will start another thread because I want to know.
I agree JC. My point... and the point of others here... is that while this particular group is the one holding mis spelled signs and calling the current president names... we only have to go back but a few years to see other groups doing the same. Discounting, ignoring or deriding them was a mistake in the past and it is true now.
Stephen thinks it is fair to say that "a large number of them are racist and racistly motivated." While I am sure that some of them are... I do not think his statement is true. Stephen thinks most are "jackasses"... probably not true either. They are definitely from another spectrum of politics than he adheres to but that certainly does not make them racist, jackasses, nor serial mis-spellers.
They are every day middle class folk who are concerned about the direction of their country.
Let me say again... I do not identify with, nor participate in, the Tea Party movement. They do however need to be heard and their concerns addressed... from both republicans and democrats.
I think a lot of them are racially motivated. I spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before. The thing is that many of these people are smart enough to know that their ideas are not publicly acceptable so they don't voice their racist ideas and they claim they aren't, I guess that would be closet racism?
QuoteI spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before.
No doubt... I think you would agree that the statement... "Most construction workers in Jacksonville are racist" would be an unfair characterization of an entire group of people.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 01:07:45 PM
QuoteI spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before.
No doubt... I think you would agree that the statement... "Most construction workers in Jacksonville are racist" would be an unfair characterization of an entire group of people.
Most of the construction workers I have worked with are racist. Outside my experience, I really cant say. Maybe I have a low threshold for what I think a racist is but whatever, its a moot point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h1oRP7FfBw
Stephen-
My taxes went up this year and I actually take home less than I did last year.
I find it funny that the Mainstream Media "reports" that the Tea Party is filled with racism and hate (despite no arrests or violence) yet blatantly ignores stories like this one in where a Republican woman and her Male Friend were jumped by a group of Leftist Protesters outside the SRLC in New Orleans on 4/9 leaving her with broken leg. Getting violent on Women is a terrible way to get your message across, Leftys.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/04/police-release-description-of-allee-bautsch-attacker-dirty-white-ponytail-auburn-hair-thin-beard/
http://thehayride.com/2010/04/the-brennans-beatdown-piecing-together-a-story/
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 01:11:44 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 01:07:45 PM
QuoteI spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before.
No doubt... I think you would agree that the statement... "Most construction workers in Jacksonville are racist" would be an unfair characterization of an entire group of people.
Most of the construction workers I have worked with are racist. Outside my experience, I really cant say. Maybe I have a low threshold for what I think a racist is but whatever, its a moot point.
You really should keep better company.
Racism is found in the hearts of the fearful and hateful. I have no racists on my crew, and any mention of racism will lead to dismissal. Construction workers are better people than most give credit for.
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 01:11:44 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 01:07:45 PM
QuoteI spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before.
No doubt... I think you would agree that the statement... "Most construction workers in Jacksonville are racist" would be an unfair characterization of an entire group of people.
Most of the construction workers I have worked with are racist. Outside my experience, I really cant say. Maybe I have a low threshold for what I think a racist is but whatever, its a moot point.
Stereotypes are a real time saver.
Ignorance has no skin color associated with it.
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 02:10:53 PM
Stephen-
My taxes went up this year and I actually take home less than I did last year.
Well then you're in the minority.
In 2010, the average American needs to work 99 days to meet their tax obligations....that's the lowest it has been in over 35 years....for comparison, under W it took as much as 124 days.
Unfortunately, this isn't necessarily a good thing....we'll need more revenues (along with spending controls) to wipe out the budegt deficit.
Quote from: buckethead on April 15, 2010, 02:23:10 PM
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 01:11:44 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 01:07:45 PM
QuoteI spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before.
No doubt... I think you would agree that the statement... "Most construction workers in Jacksonville are racist" would be an unfair characterization of an entire group of people.
Most of the construction workers I have worked with are racist. Outside my experience, I really cant say. Maybe I have a low threshold for what I think a racist is but whatever, its a moot point.
You really should keep better company.
Racism is found in the hearts of the fearful and hateful. I have no racists on my crew, and any mention of racism will lead to dismissal. Construction workers are better people than most give credit for.
I am going to make a quick point then I am done on this topic.
You make a company statement that your company will not tolerate racism.
The men know this and therefore do NOT display their racist tendencies.
You have no idea who is racist on your crew because they keep it to themselves.
I worked for a prominent contractor in the area. I walked up to the shop one morning to get the day's assignment and one of the mid level managers was standing outside, I said "hey" to him. Then he proceeded to tell me that James Brown had died the day before and "now the monkeys will want another day off" and made some other comment to go with it relating it to MLK. It was all I could do not to hit him, seriously, and I warned him that it wasn't ok, to talk like that around me, that it wouldn't be safe for him to do it again. Well, he never said another racist word around me again but I can promise you that my statement did nothing to change his views.
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 02:16:06 PM
I find it funny that the Mainstream Media "reports" that the Tea Party is filled with racism and hate (despite no arrests or violence) yet blatantly ignores stories like this one in where a Republican woman and her Male Friend were jumped by a group of Leftist Protesters outside the SRLC in New Orleans on 4/9 leaving her with broken leg. Getting violent on Women is a terrible way to get your message across, Leftys.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/04/police-release-description-of-allee-bautsch-attacker-dirty-white-ponytail-auburn-hair-thin-beard/
http://thehayride.com/2010/04/the-brennans-beatdown-piecing-together-a-story/
This is such a great tactic you are using here. In order to make the right wing protesters look better you are comparing them to the lowest possible common denominator of lefty protesters. Like I could say, well "at least the lefties dont spit on and call civil rights leaders niggers." Then of course I would be told how I should not characterize and entire political movement as racist, which would be correct.
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 02:25:37 PM
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 01:11:44 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 01:07:45 PM
QuoteI spent 10 years working construction in Jacksonville and had never heard so much racism before.
No doubt... I think you would agree that the statement... "Most construction workers in Jacksonville are racist" would be an unfair characterization of an entire group of people.
Most of the construction workers I have worked with are racist. Outside my experience, I really cant say. Maybe I have a low threshold for what I think a racist is but whatever, its a moot point.
Stereotypes are a real time saver.
Ignorance has no skin color associated with it.
LOL... "love sees no color" blah blah... Actions speak louder than words!
Well, I am about to take care of some last minute chores, get a quick shower and a bite to eat and head out for this, so-called Tea Party. If anyone wants to spit on me and call me nasty names I will be wearing a green St. Patrick's Day Yankees hat, it even has a shamrock on the side :). I will of course be taking photos so I will be moving about, but I am easy to spot. I hope to meet one or two of you there. Remember its all about community!
Meet Mr. Dale Robertson... the Teaparty.org website founder.
(http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss288/MoronsWithSigns/teabagfounderdalerobert.jpg)
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 01:11:44 PM
This is such a great tactic you are using here. In order to make the right wing protesters look better you are comparing them to the lowest possible common denominator of lefty protesters. Like I could say, well "at least the lefties dont spit on and call civil rights leaders niggers." Then of course I would be told how I should not characterize and entire political movement as racist, which would be correct.
First off, it's not a tactic. I'm merely pointing out an example of mainstream media bias. They continuously publish stories about Tea Partiers being "racist" and "filled with hate" without any photographic and video evidence, proof of arrests, proof of violence, etc. Yet a story like the one at the SRLC with plenty of video and photographic evidence, they ignore. However you spin it, that is biased journalism.
But since you want to talk about "tactics", didn't you post a link to a Teabonics site? A "tactic" that attempts to stereotype Tea Partiers by their "lowest possible common denominator" because some of them have spelling issues?
Before you stereotype, Disclaimer: I am not associated with the Tea Party nor am I a Republican.
Quote from: RiversideLoki on April 15, 2010, 03:34:02 PM
Meet Mr. Dale Robertson... the Teaparty.org website founder.
(http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss288/MoronsWithSigns/teabagfounderdalerobert.jpg)
I stand corrected. A Tea Partier with A sign filled with hate. I bet he spit and fought someone right after that photo was taken, too.
Now, after I've defended their movement for being non-violent and non-hate, watch the Tea Partiers go out tonight and make this the most violent, hate-filled protest ever. You all can rib me tomorrow.
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 03:56:26 PM
However you spin it, that is biased journalism.
That's why it's best to get one's information only from FOX News. They are always fair and balanced.
All journalism is biased, humans are involved. So when you watch one network you get one story, when you watch another you get a different story. All mainstream media are slaves to their corporate masters, be it MSNBC or FOX, they are all bought and paid for, as in, the debate is controlled by those who want to control it.
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 04:15:55 PM
All mainstream media are slaves to their corporate masters, be it MSNBC or FOX, they are all bought and paid for, as in, the debate is controlled by those who want to control it.
You'll get no argument from me there. But if someone believes the mainstream media is an organ of the progressive movement and the functional liberal equivalent of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, then they are either delusional or willfully ignorant. The mainstream media is far more receptive to news and viewpoints that challenge liberalism than conservative outlets are to news and viewpoints that challenge conservatism.
Quote from: finehoe on April 15, 2010, 04:41:17 PM
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 04:15:55 PM
All mainstream media are slaves to their corporate masters, be it MSNBC or FOX, they are all bought and paid for, as in, the debate is controlled by those who want to control it.
You'll get no argument from me there. But if someone believes the mainstream media is an organ of the progressive movement and the functional liberal equivalent of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, then they are either delusional or willfully ignorant. The mainstream media is far more receptive to news and viewpoints that challenge liberalism than conservative outlets are to news and viewpoints that challenge conservatism.
That is your opinion, not fact.
And nice attempt at a backhanded put-down, but I'm neither delusional or willfully ignorant. I see things quite clearly.
The fact of the matter (in my original post) is that ALL mainstream media outlets have ignored the story of a Republican Woman and Man being attacked by Far-Left Protesters when they left a restaurant for almost a week now.
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 02:54:18 PM
Well, I am about to take care of some last minute chores, get a quick shower and a bite to eat and head out for this, so-called Tea Party. If anyone wants to spit on me and call me nasty names I will be wearing a green St. Patrick's Day Yankees hat, it even has a shamrock on the side :). I will of course be taking photos so I will be moving about, but I am easy to spot. I hope to meet one or two of you there. Remember its all about community!
Have fun at the rally, JC!
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 11:00:51 AM
QuoteMany, many, many of these people who engage in the Tea Parties are doing so out of fear, which leads to anger all brought forth by propaganda filled with lies and half truths.
They must be proud... being the only group to ever be possibly influenced by such tripe!! :D ::)
QuoteBut if someone holds a sign calling Obama Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld or... etc etc etc...a socialist, or a Nazi, they are fair game in my book.
Cmon JC... do you hear yourself? :)
I thought it was against the rules to mention deleted posts on this site. When I mention my posts being deleted StephenDare! you just delete them again. What are the rules? And do they apply to all?
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 11:36:01 AM
Pop Quiz. Did your Taxes go up or down this year?
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/157591/thumbs/r-TAX-DAY-huge.jpg)
I am paying more. Sixteen different taxes have gone up this year.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 15, 2010, 02:37:47 PM
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 02:10:53 PM
Stephen-
My taxes went up this year and I actually take home less than I did last year.
Well then you're in the minority.
In 2010, the average American needs to work 99 days to meet their tax obligations....that's the lowest it has been in over 35 years....for comparison, under W it took as much as 124 days.
Unfortunately, this isn't necessarily a good thing....we'll need more revenues (along with spending controls) to wipe out the budegt deficit.
Your source for this information? What revenues and spending controls would you suggest?
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_tax_in_the_United_States
And just wait until next year:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts
rules only apply to those that dont agree with some people on here.
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 05:09:27 PM
The fact of the matter (in my original post) is that ALL mainstream media outlets have ignored the story of a Republican Woman and Man being attacked by Far-Left Protesters when they left a restaurant for almost a week now.
This is a tiresome, formulaic tactic. Take the topic at hand, sidestep any critique aimed at the right, and transition to talking about how the problem is actually liberal in origin, or that liberals do it more often, or that the left is actually more guilty of it, or whatever. This is persuasive at times, less so at others, and too often beside the point.
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 08:49:56 AM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 15, 2010, 06:44:00 AM
QuoteHopefully Notnow and BT will be out before hand with a spell checker.
Never been to... and not part of the movement and your attempt to identify me with this group is pretty silly... Even more silly is your attempt to use a few spelling errors to identify them as a group while ignoring the same type of errors from protesters of other groups. ::) :)
I see that your own quotes on the spelling errors of the libruls have been erased, but this seemed to be a simple enough idea when you agreed with it. :D
Sorry, pushed the wrong "quote" button. This is where StephenDare! mentions his post being deleted, which he tells me is against the rules when I protest him deleting my posts (and my views).
Quote from: stephendare on April 15, 2010, 11:00:35 AM
Quote from: Tripoli1711 on April 15, 2010, 10:07:27 AM
The sign spelling "jokes", to put that term as loosely as possible, are really getting rather annoying. I understand the disagreement with the message, but to continually deride these people reflects rather poorly on yourselves. They are citizens of this country just like you are. They are concerned about their nation, just as I am sure you are. They have at least taken enough time out of their lives to turn off the TV, make a crude sign and try to get involved. That's a heck of a lot more than can be said for most. You can totally disagree with their message and you can believe their being misguided is a result of their being uninformed or incapable of grasping the issues. To paint the tea parties in that light I also believe to be enormously broad and untrue, but even that would not motivate me to post this.
But the transparent holier than thou patting yourself on the back you engage in by relentlessly making fun of these people annoys me and makes me less inclined to value anything else you have to say. Sorry, but I had to say it.
Well somehow the comments I quoted were deleted, but its pretty much comeuppance for the many comments made by the rightwingers (specifically on this site) when the shoe was on the other foot.
And here.
Double standards.
So, I havenot seen a single racist sign yet. And I've been here since 5:30.
But...But...talk to those people JC. We have been assured that they are all nincompoops, boobs, maroons, and RACISTS! Surely when you talk to them their true colors will show. Their grammar MUST be horrible!
Quote from: NotNow on April 15, 2010, 07:17:19 PM
But...But...talk to those people JC. We have been assured that they are all nincompoops, boobs, maroons, and RACISTS! Surely when you talk to them their true colors will show. Their grammar MUST be horrible!
Nope grammar is fine too. Nothing to report really. I don't support their overall position but what I am seeing is not what I've been seeing on the tv.
So these actually might be middle class Americans out supporting a conservative or libertarian leaning political viewpoint in a peaceful and civilized manner?
OMG! That doesn't sell newspapers...or generate hits or an outlandish thread title. Quick, find a misspelled sign and take a picture of it, or at least find one that we can easily photoshop.
;)
or have someone go out there and make one on purpose to take a pic of
Careful y'all...you're disrupting the narrative!! And you know what happens around where when you do that...
;)
Don't go yet, JC... I'll be there with my poorly worded, inflamatory signs in a few minutes.
I had to smack a couple republicans up, so I was delayed.
Quote from: buckethead on April 15, 2010, 07:51:58 PM
Don't go yet, JC... I'll be there with my poorly worded, inflamatory signs in a few minutes.
I had to smack a couple republicans up, so I was delayed.
Ha!
This rally, or whatever, was what the organizers said it would be. I cannot comment on other so-called tea parties but this was rather sedate.
My tea party photo! I have more but I like this one best at the moment.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4061/4524334165_16c2a886a8.jpg)
Thanks for the pic JC... looks to be a pretty diverse crowd.
BIG government means expanded MPO and BIG 'new' BELTWAY..........somehow I imagine this subject will go missing
MPO? Help me out.
MPO = Metropolitan Planning Organization.
Thanks.
I'd be interested in your opinion of this:
QuoteThe last week has seen a lot of analysis of the Tea Party Movement. It's a Republican rump, according to the NYT, and a national majority, according to Pat Caddell. My view is that it's so amorphous that you can slice it any which way. A minority of Americans seem enraged by the Obama administration in ways that are hard to explain. But many Americans also retain a healthy distrust of government and debt (even though they keep voting for lower taxes and more spending). They have a real point. Over the last decade, it is surely evident that big government has come back with a vengeance. And one has to grasp that part of the tea-party anger is pent up from the Bush years. Most of the rational tea-partiers accept that the GOP has been as bad - if not worse - than the Democrats on spending, borrowing and the size and scope of government in recent years. They repressed this anger during the Bush years out of partisan loyalty. Now, they're taking it all out on the newbie. It's both fair and also unfair.
It's fair because Obama is a liberal who believes government can and should help the poor and disadvantaged and has proven it by providing access to insurance for the working poor. But it's unfair because Obama's fiscal and governing record is massively distorted by the impact of the bank meltdown, the steep revenue-killing recession, and the stimulus. Until its last months, the Bush administration could claim no such excuses for its awful debt-management. The big Bush jumps in discretionary spending, the big leap in entitlements under the unfunded Medicare D program, the long nation-building wars put off-budget, and the huge claims for executive power dominant in the first term: all these are far more damning to my mind than Obama's pragmatism in grappling with an economic collapse or even the healthcare reform, which at least formally claims to reduce the deficit and pay for itself (unlike Bush's Medicare-D). Even the protests at the manner in which the health reform was passed are disingenuous. The Medicare-D process - involving holding the vote open for hours and brutal arm-twisting on the floor of the House - was far, far more cynical and brutal.
And this is why, despite my own deep suspicion of big government, I remain unmoved by the tea-partiers. Their partisanship and cultural hostility to Obama are far more intense, it seems to me, than their genuine proposals to reduce spending and taxation. And this is largely because they have no genuine proposals to reduce spending and taxation. They seem very protective of Medicare and Social Security - and their older age bracket underlines this. They also seem primed for maximal neo-imperial reach, backing the nation-building efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, favoring war against Iran, etc. Only Ron Paul, peace be upon him, extends his big government critique to the military-industrial-ideological complex.
So they are truly not serious in policy terms, and it behooves the small government right to grapple with this honestly. They both support lower taxation and yet bemoan the fact that so many Americans do not pay any income tax. They want to cut spending on trivial matters while enabling the entitlement and defense behemoths to go on gobbling up Americans' wealth. And that lack of seriousness is complemented by a near-fanatical cultural alienation from the modern world.
In my view, this confluence of feelings can work in shifting the public mood, as seems to have happened. When there is no internal pushback against crafted FNC propaganda, and when the Democrats seem unable to craft any coherent political message below the presidential level, you do indeed create a self-perpetuating fantasy that can indeed rally and roil people. But the abstract slogans against government, the childish reduction of necessary trade-offs as an apocalyptic battle between freedom and slavery, and the silly ranting at all things Washington: these are not a political movement. They are cultural vents, wrapped up with some ugly Dixie-like strands.
When they propose cuts in Medicare, means-testing social security, a raising of the retirement age and a cut in defense spending, I'll take them seriously and wish them well.
Until then, I'll treat them with the condescending contempt they have thus far deserved.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/04/why-im-passing-on-tea.html
Opinion piece... nothing more...
Most political analysis is opinion. Opinion is fine to consider.
I have always thought so too.
"It's fair because Obama is a liberal who believes government can and should help the poor and disadvantaged and has proven it by providing access to insurance for the working poor. But it's unfair because Obama's fiscal and governing record is massively distorted by the impact of the bank meltdown, the steep revenue-killing recession, and the stimulus."
He makes some worthwhile critiques, some of which do beg for an answer, but this passage is just total spin. Yes, people are mad at Obama because he wants to help the poor and disadvantaged. Anything he has done that is not good is not his fault.... If he is to point the finger at others it would make his position a bit more viable to acknowledge that Obama (you can add "too" in if you like) is spending money on many things about as quickly as it can be printed.
He makes cogent arguments in some spots, particularly about the inherent distrust in big government that many Americans have and the fact that Congressional Republicans from about 2000-2006 were awful on such topics.
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 02:16:06 PM
I find it funny that the Mainstream Media "reports" that the Tea Party is filled with racism and hate (despite no arrests or violence) yet blatantly ignores stories like this one in where a Republican woman and her Male Friend were jumped by a group of Leftist Protesters outside the SRLC in New Orleans on 4/9 leaving her with broken leg. Getting violent on Women is a terrible way to get your message across, Leftys.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/04/police-release-description-of-allee-bautsch-attacker-dirty-white-ponytail-auburn-hair-thin-beard/
http://thehayride.com/2010/04/the-brennans-beatdown-piecing-together-a-story/
Hmm. According to one of the articles you linked, the chick who got her leg broken played down the political angle.
QuoteShe also said, without going into specifics of what was said, that “it was all about money.â€
In other words, they got mugged, and now the right is trying to blame it on left wing protesters, because it is absolutely impossible that anybody could get violently robbed in New Orleans without some communist socialist fascist anti-American terrorist Democrats being behind it. Crime in New Orleans? Harrumph. Perish the THOUGHT.
Never mind the Whiskey Rebellion, what about the actual Boston Tea Party?
The teabaggers can't possibly be anything but uneducated boobs if they think they have anything in common with the original Boston Tea Party. As Bob Cesca points out in his WalletPop column today (http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/04/15/tea-party-movement-confused-about-taxes-and-the-boston-tea-party/), they are grossly misinterpreting a significant event in American history.
The original Boston Tea Party was not about wanting to evade income taxes; our Founding Fathers were pissed off about a huge, unfair CORPORATE TAX CUT that threatened to put small, mom-and-pop companies out of business.
The only reason the colonists had a problem with paying taxes is because their interests were not represented in Parliament. Remember? No taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION?
Yet the teabaggers, this warbling pack of hydrocephalic troglodytes, they HAVE representatives in the government, and just got the biggest middle-class tax cut in the history of the United States, so what the frickety-fracking hoo-hah are they actually angry about?
Some of them say they want more transparency and accountability in government. That's perfectly valid. But if you ask one of them what government department or function or specific expense they want more accountability about, who they should be directly accountable to, and what would you like to see done to solve any problems the oversight committee finds, they just start chanting "USA! USA! USA!" which makes me inclined to think they have no earthly idea what they're talking about. They're probably just repeating some crap some right-wing jerkface said on the teevee without knowing what it means.
It is my personal opinion that every last thing teabaggers say is either racist or a smokescreen for racism. Come on, a commenter on the WalletPop article I linked above flatly stated that they think it's racist for white people to have to pay income taxes, because in their deluded little minds, all that hard-earned white money goes straight to non-white people. Because no colored people work or pay taxes, obviously.
Racist, deluded, misinformed, wilfully ignorant. And they can't spell for sour owl poop.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 04:53:47 PM
Never mind the Whiskey Rebellion, what about the actual Boston Tea Party?
The teabaggers can't possibly be anything but uneducated boobs if they think they have anything in common with the original Boston Tea Party. As Bob Cesca points out in his WalletPop column today (http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/04/15/tea-party-movement-confused-about-taxes-and-the-boston-tea-party/), they are grossly misinterpreting a significant event in American history.
The original Boston Tea Party was not about wanting to evade income taxes; our Founding Fathers were pissed off about a huge, unfair CORPORATE TAX CUT that threatened to put small, mom-and-pop companies out of business.
The only reason the colonists had a problem with paying taxes is because their interests were not represented in Parliament. Remember? No taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION? Yet the teabaggers, this warbling pack of hydrocephalic troglodytes, they HAVE representatives in the government, and just got the biggest middle-class tax cut in the history of the United States, so what the frickety-fracking hoo-hah are they actually angry about? You can't be that blind.
Some of them say they want more transparency and accountability in government. That's perfectly valid. But if you ask one of them what government department or function or specific expense they want more accountability about, who they should be directly accountable to, and what would you like to see done to solve any problems the oversight committee finds, they just start chanting "USA! USA! USA!" which makes me inclined to think they have no earthly idea what they're talking about. They're probably just repeating some crap some right-wing jerkface said on the teevee without knowing what it means.
A lot of that going around!
It is my personal opinion that every last thing teabaggers say is either racist or a smokescreen for racism. Come on, a commenter on the WalletPop article I linked above flatly stated that they think it's racist for white people to have to pay income taxes, because in their deluded little minds, all that hard-earned white money goes straight to non-white people. Because no colored people work or pay taxes, obviously.
Racist, deluded, misinformed, wilfully ignorant. And they can't spell for sour owl poop.
You are way off base. Being cute does not give you license to make stuff up. Being white does not disallow dissent.
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
Oh, and cute has nothing to do with anything. I've been seething about that for a few minutes now, and I deeply resent the implication that being reasonably attractive means I'm a lying dimwit. That is revoltingly sexist.
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 04:53:47 PM
Never mind the Whiskey Rebellion, what about the actual Boston Tea Party?
The teabaggers can't possibly be anything but uneducated boobs if they think they have anything in common with the original Boston Tea Party. As Bob Cesca points out in his WalletPop column today (http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/04/15/tea-party-movement-confused-about-taxes-and-the-boston-tea-party/), they are grossly misinterpreting a significant event in American history.
The original Boston Tea Party was not about wanting to evade income taxes; our Founding Fathers were pissed off about a huge, unfair CORPORATE TAX CUT that threatened to put small, mom-and-pop companies out of business.
The only reason the colonists had a problem with paying taxes is because their interests were not represented in Parliament. Remember? No taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION? Yet the teabaggers, this warbling pack of hydrocephalic troglodytes, they HAVE representatives in the government, and just got the biggest middle-class tax cut in the history of the United States, so what the frickety-fracking hoo-hah are they actually angry about? You can't be that blind.
Some of them say they want more transparency and accountability in government. That's perfectly valid. But if you ask one of them what government department or function or specific expense they want more accountability about, who they should be directly accountable to, and what would you like to see done to solve any problems the oversight committee finds, they just start chanting "USA! USA! USA!" which makes me inclined to think they have no earthly idea what they're talking about. They're probably just repeating some crap some right-wing jerkface said on the teevee without knowing what it means.
A lot of that going around!
It is my personal opinion that every last thing teabaggers say is either racist or a smokescreen for racism. Come on, a commenter on the WalletPop article I linked above flatly stated that they think it's racist for white people to have to pay income taxes, because in their deluded little minds, all that hard-earned white money goes straight to non-white people. Because no colored people work or pay taxes, obviously.
Racist, deluded, misinformed, wilfully ignorant. And they can't spell for sour owl poop.
You are way off base. Being cute does not give you license to make stuff up. Being white does not disallow dissent.
No one said being white disallows dissent, enough with the straw man arguments already!
Also, for the purpose of this discussion it would be great if you would avoid being sexist.
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 03:09:59 PM
Quote from: Jameson on April 15, 2010, 02:16:06 PM
I find it funny that the Mainstream Media "reports" that the Tea Party is filled with racism and hate (despite no arrests or violence) yet blatantly ignores stories like this one in where a Republican woman and her Male Friend were jumped by a group of Leftist Protesters outside the SRLC in New Orleans on 4/9 leaving her with broken leg. Getting violent on Women is a terrible way to get your message across, Leftys.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/04/police-release-description-of-allee-bautsch-attacker-dirty-white-ponytail-auburn-hair-thin-beard/
http://thehayride.com/2010/04/the-brennans-beatdown-piecing-together-a-story/
Hmm. According to one of the articles you linked, the chick who got her leg broken played down the political angle.
QuoteShe also said, without going into specifics of what was said, that “it was all about money.â€
In other words, they got mugged, and now the right is trying to blame it on left wing protesters, because it is absolutely impossible that anybody could get violently robbed in New Orleans without some communist socialist fascist anti-American terrorist Democrats being behind it. Crime in New Orleans? Harrumph. Perish the THOUGHT.
Please read the Gateway Pundit article again:
"Officers in the area heard the female screaming and responded to the scene and broadcasted a description of the suspects and requested Emergency Medical Paramedics. As the female was waiting for EMS , she used her purse as a pillow. When the victim was in the ambulance, she discovered her purse was missing."
Also read the 2:08PM update on the Hayride.
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
heaven forbid that anyone actually be racist, sexist or homophobic, right?
I guess that would require some proof. Like badly spelled signs carried around in public?
It's racist to point out that somebody's being racist, you know.
But PLEASE, somebody tell me, WHAT exactly is this "progressive nonsense" being dissented against? Paved roads? Meat inspectors? OSHA? What?
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:03:49 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
Here's a quick, easy read on what the Tea Party wants:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/15/dennis.tea.party.goals/index.html
I'm not a Tea Partier nor am I a Republican/Right Winger. But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:03:49 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
You imply that "teabaggers" seek to evade taxes. I doubt that is anywhere close to fact. (although certain members of the current administratyion have demonstrated a willingness to do exactly that)
The larger platform of the grass roots (astro turf) organization is exactly what they suggest. Stop confiscating an ever increasing portion of our money, only to squander it. Taxes as a portion of GDP still come from the public, even if you only tax corporations. Big brother keeps taking a bigger slice of the pie, while our national debt soars and deficits spin out of control.
I do not consider myself to be a member of that particular movement, but they are entitled to speak their minds without being slandered.
JC, I'm glad you made it our of the Tea Party alive last night, Bro!
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:28:08 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
heaven forbid that anyone actually be racist, sexist or homophobic, right?
I guess that would require some proof. Like badly spelled signs carried around in public?
It's racist to point out that somebody's being racist, you know.
But PLEASE, somebody tell me, WHAT exactly is this "progressive nonsense" being dissented against? Paved roads? Meat inspectors? OSHA? What?
It is not racist to point out racism. It is slander to call opposition to a certain policy racist where there is no evidence of such.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:28:08 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
heaven forbid that anyone actually be racist, sexist or homophobic, right?
I guess that would require some proof. Like badly spelled signs carried around in public?
It's racist to point out that somebody's being racist, you know.
But PLEASE, somebody tell me, WHAT exactly is this "progressive nonsense" being dissented against? Paved roads? Meat inspectors? OSHA? What?
"The Guaranteed Profits for Private Insurers Act of 2010 would be one example, though strictly speaking it was niether a socialist nor progressive piece of legislation. Cap and Trade is another corporate welfare act being touted by the representatives self described progressives voted into office.
Quote from: Jameson on April 16, 2010, 05:28:29 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:03:49 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
Here's a quick, easy read on what the Tea Party wants:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/15/dennis.tea.party.goals/index.html
I'm not a Tea Partier nor am I a Republican/Right Winger. But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
I read the article, and they really ARE against meat inspectors! That was a good guess, but I was actually attempting to be absurd. They are also against clean air, education, and anything that benefits poor people.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:55:19 PM
Quote from: Jameson on April 16, 2010, 05:28:29 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:03:49 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
Here's a quick, easy read on what the Tea Party wants:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/15/dennis.tea.party.goals/index.html
I'm not a Tea Partier nor am I a Republican/Right Winger. But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
I read the article, and they really ARE against meat inspectors! That was a good guess, but I was actually attempting to be absurd. They are also against clean air, education, and anything that benefits poor people.
Seriously?!? That's what you came away with.
You fail at critical thinking.
Fiscal responsibility would mean military cuts, healthcare reform and mega corprate welfare reduction. If you are in the tea party Obama is a President who acts like he cares about the biggest of our over spending problems.
Quote from: redglittercoffin on April 16, 2010, 06:11:21 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:55:19 PM
Quote from: Jameson on April 16, 2010, 05:28:29 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:03:49 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
Here's a quick, easy read on what the Tea Party wants:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/15/dennis.tea.party.goals/index.html
I'm not a Tea Partier nor am I a Republican/Right Winger. But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
I read the article, and they really ARE against meat inspectors! That was a good guess, but I was actually attempting to be absurd. They are also against clean air, education, and anything that benefits poor people.
Seriously?!? That's what you came away with.
You fail at critical thinking.
I'm not sure what you believe "critical thinking" means, but I most certainly am not failing at it. However, I have succeeded in oversimplifying the words of a jackass who wants to abolish the USDA, and did so in an irritating manner, which is exactly what I intended. (The USDA is the meat inspector department, by the way.)
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:43:53 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:32:11 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:28:08 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
heaven forbid that anyone actually be racist, sexist or homophobic, right?
I guess that would require some proof. Like badly spelled signs carried around in public?
It's racist to point out that somebody's being racist, you know.
But PLEASE, somebody tell me, WHAT exactly is this "progressive nonsense" being dissented against? Paved roads? Meat inspectors? OSHA? What?
It is not racist to point out racism. It is slander to call opposition to a certain policy racist where there is no evidence of such.
And would the evidence be the presence of racist signs?
(http://gratuity.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/niggar-sign-tea-party.jpg)
founder of the tea party
That guy is a registered Democrat plant.
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 06:45:52 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:43:53 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:32:11 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:28:08 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
heaven forbid that anyone actually be racist, sexist or homophobic, right?
I guess that would require some proof. Like badly spelled signs carried around in public?
It's racist to point out that somebody's being racist, you know.
But PLEASE, somebody tell me, WHAT exactly is this "progressive nonsense" being dissented against? Paved roads? Meat inspectors? OSHA? What?
It is not racist to point out racism. It is slander to call opposition to a certain policy racist where there is no evidence of such.
And would the evidence be the presence of racist signs?
(http://gratuity.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/niggar-sign-tea-party.jpg)
founder of the tea party
That guy is a registered Democrat plant.
Prove it. Oh, wait, don't bother trying. His name is Dale Robertson, and he's a Tea Party activist who operates the website TeaParty.org. In all fairness, he did get kicked out of the event where he was waving his niggar sign, and the damning photo was taken over a year ago, but I sincerely doubt he's magically ceased to be a bigot since then.
http://washingtonindependent.com/73036/n-word-sign-dogs-would-be-tea-party-leader
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
Again, a straw man!
What was your intent when you made a value judgment regarding physical appearance of a woman you are having a political discussion with? Never mind, don't bother answering it because there is no justification, simply put, you were being sexist when you did what you did. I am not surprised you don't understand why you are being sexist....
But that is the type of shit I am talking about when I make generalizations about racist construction workers. Sorry, but if you look over your shoulder before you make a joke at the expense of someone not like you, you are a racist! If you wouldn't "let" your daughter "date one" you are racist and sexist! You might not stand on the corner yelling nigger, but you are still racist!
Quote from: redglittercoffin on April 16, 2010, 06:11:21 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:55:19 PM
Quote from: Jameson on April 16, 2010, 05:28:29 PM
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:03:49 PM
If you think I'm making stuff up, feel free to post factual corrections.
Here's a quick, easy read on what the Tea Party wants:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/15/dennis.tea.party.goals/index.html
I'm not a Tea Partier nor am I a Republican/Right Winger. But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
I read the article, and they really ARE against meat inspectors! That was a good guess, but I was actually attempting to be absurd. They are also against clean air, education, and anything that benefits poor people.
Seriously?!? That's what you came away with.
You fail at critical thinking.
Wrong.
Fine. In detail, what I came away with was this:
The teabaggers want to get rid of the Department of Education. The Department of Education formulates federal funding programs for education.
I doubt their glee over abolishing ED would last more than a nanosecond after all schools become private, and they find out they have to pay THEIR OWN actual money to get their snot-dripping hellspawn into school and out of the house during the day. Oh, and tuition would surely cost a hell of a lot more than the tax break any individual would get from eliminating the Education Department. I guess if they don't want to pay tuition, these people with no grasp of grammar, spelling or history could just homeschool the wretched beasts, thus perpetuating the cycle of brain-curdling stoopid.
The teabaggers want to get rid of the USDA. To oversimplify again: They're against meat inspectors. Obviously, that's not all the United States Department of Agriculture does, but one of their more important functions is trying to prevent our food supply from killing us in spectacularly gruesome ways (http://people.tribe.net/mike_c/blog/5b15dd41-819a-41c5-95ae-b38ea677181e). Personally, I'd rather not die of brain rot from a contaminated meatball.
Oh, and they want to get rid of the EPA, which I oversimplified as saying they're against clean air, which is is not entirely correct. It
really means they're against clean air, clean water, non-toxic soil, and fuel-efficient cars. Oh, and they want it to be legal to randomly dump toxic waste anywhere, or at least that's what it seems like, since one of the EPA's main jobs is attempting to prevent industries from poisoning everybody to death. They're doing a poor job of it the last few years, but that's because the Bush administration took away the EPA's shitkicking boots, making it difficult for them to enforce the environmental protection laws.
The teabaggers say send responsibility for these functions to the individual states, but where the hell do they think the states are going to get the money from? And do they have any idea what an insane tangle of conflicting laws about education, food safety and environmental regulations we would have from state to state?
Just the conflicts between food safety regs could strangle interstate commerce, unless you just chucked all the rules out, and just let the food industry sell us any kind of filthy, mutated, contaminated garbage they want, disguised and labeled as food. Do the teabaggers think the food companies are going to spend the extra money it costs to ensure our safety out of the kindness of their hearts?
Next, they want to eliminate all social services to illegal immigrants, and drastically reduce welfare and unemployment benefits for poor citizens. This would be those poor people I was talking about, and it's such an enormous problem that I'm not going to attempt to address it here. I
will say that I don't think the answer is kicking people when they're down, and hoping they die quickly if they get sick.
The teabag dude also says the federal government can't do anything efficiently. Hmm. I guess being able to drop a birthday card into a box on the East coast and have it delivered to your sister on the West coast in less than three days, for less than fifty cents is the very height of incompetence.
So, why don't we get rid of the U.S. Postal Service, while we're at it? And the FDA! If we get rid of the FDA, then the drug companies can sell untested drugs and just use EVERYBODY as guinea pigs, instead of doing controlled studies! It'll cut costs, and medication will be cheaper, if they work and if you survive the non-clinical trials.
Ooh, ooh, and instead of sending out Census workers, we should send out people to administer the Citizenship exam that foreigners have to take to become naturalized citizens! Anybody who fails the test gets their citizenship revoked, they get deported, and the Census won't have to count them!
Quote from: JC on April 16, 2010, 07:25:53 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
Again, a straw man!
What was your intent when you made a value judgment regarding physical appearance of a woman you are having a political discussion with? Never mind, don't bother answering it because there is no justification, simply put, you were being sexist when you did what you did. I am not surprised you don't understand why you are being sexist....
But that is the type of shit I am talking about when I make generalizations about racist construction workers. Sorry, but if you look over your shoulder before you make a joke at the expense of someone not like you, you are a racist! If you wouldn't "let" your daughter "date one" you are racist and sexist! You might not stand on the corner yelling nigger, but you are still racist!
Clearly there is no refutation of any substantive point made by myself nor the main platform of the tea party. Just shrieking and name calling. Typical female... :) How's that for sexist?
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 08:22:03 PM
Clearly there is no refutation of any substantive point made by myself nor the main platform of the tea party.
So, you apparently didn't bother reading my point-by-point criticism of the more egregiously stupid parts of the teabagger "platform" that I posted several minutes before you resumed making sexist remarks?
Well if I'm going to be accused of being a racist sexist homophobe, what the heck?
You point by point diatribe was so riddled with vitriol and lacking any resemblance to rationality, I see no point in debating it.
I do enjoy reading most of your posts, though. I must confess I did not make it through your most recent.
http://houstontps.org/?p=1050 (http://houstontps.org/?p=1050)
QuoteA Note on Dale Robertson, self-described “tea party leaderâ€
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
By Felicia Cravens
In response to questions we have received regarding Dale Robertson and his involvement with HoustonTPS, and specifically in reference to his attendance at our rally on 27 Feb 2009, we would like to state that:
1. He is NOT a member of our Leadership team.
2. He owns a website with which we have never been affiliated.
3. He has never been a part of organizing any of the Tea Party rallies in the Houston area, or any other area that we can find.
4. We addressed some issues involving him back in April. Here it is on our website, where Mr. Robertson himself comments: http://houstontps.org/?p=318
5. We do not choose to associate with people that use his type of disgusting language.
A search on Google yields plenty of information about Mr. Robertson, and a search of the various leadership teams among legitimate national tea party organizations show him nowhere to be found.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 6th, 2010 at 6:47 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Quote from: Jameson on April 16, 2010, 05:28:29 PM
But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
So where were they when Bush was turning a $128b surplus into $490b deficit? Why weren't they protesting then?
It would help the world tremendously if the world were full of StephenDare's. Everyone would be suuuuuuper smart and compassionate.
...if only.
We can only dream.
In the meantime Stephen, show me where the DOE is mandated by Constitution...
I think that we all can read, and determine what is "Constitutional", thank you. Part of the political argument going on here is that many Americans believe that the Federal Judiciary has disregarded the literal word of the Constitution as well as the intent as described by its authors in their written dispatches of the day in favor of expansion of Federal power.
Nope. I made the claim. You challenged it. The challenger must provide the evidence.
Of course, if you weren't acting like a petulant child, you just would have done it on your first post to me.
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 10:49:39 PM
Quote from: NotNow on April 16, 2010, 10:45:05 PM
I think that we all can read, and determine what is "Constitutional", thank you.
Well Im sure you think that. Along with all the other interesting things you think as well.
I do not share this observation, as we still require courts helmed by people way above our educational attainments to determine matters of Constitutionality, which kind of makes this statement as absurd as anything else ive ever heard said, but hey.....
Jesus Christ, really?!?!?! this is what you've got? Honestly, Stephen. You must not live in a house with mirrors. You cannot look at yourself and really believe half the sh*t you type and say.
I really must have hit home with the comment you deleted.
And yet even more puffery...
You see, what "I" think counts just as much as what "you" think. I know that you do not share this observation as well. And although those that "helm the courts" may be "way above my educational attainment", that does not mean that I must suffer their ideology. It doesn't take a law degree to read. And my "educational attainment" prompts my critical thinking and leads me to question how the largest, most indebted government in the history of the world was derived from the U S Constitution.
To determine otherwise strikes me as "absurd".
Hmm, kind of hard to have a conversation when only one guy gets to talk.
It is not absurd or "by default" incorrect. What makes you say so? And what makes you think that you "know the truth" and others don't?
I would start with these two:
Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Education in the US is traditionally a local matter, and local school districts are generally the form of administration. Accreditation is generally done by private interests or a combination of districts. The entry of the ED in Jimmy Carte's administration has only served to politicize the amount and distribution of Federal money to the individual states and districts.
With a $70 billion dollar budget, and 5000 federal employees, we would be more efficient in distributing the money if we just put it our on a per capita basis and save the bureaucracy. That is, if we just continue to forget about that pesky 9th and 10th amendment.
Quote from: DeadGirlsDontDance on April 16, 2010, 05:28:08 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: buckethead on April 16, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Racist, sexist, homophobe. That's how those who dissent against "progressive" nonsense are described. So be it.
heaven forbid that anyone actually be racist, sexist or homophobic, right?
I guess that would require some proof. Like badly spelled signs carried around in public?
It's racist to point out that somebody's being racist, you know.
WAIT WAIT WAIT, explain this...
A "prohibition" is not required. The Federal government is limited in scope and power. It has grown though a creative view of certain "clauses" which have come together over the years to become the behemoth that we now have. Most often, federal power grabs are not challenged at all anymore. This Department has been called unconstitutional since the day Jimmy Carter proposed it. It's only purpose is to put political pressure on states. The USG was not charged with "education" in the US Constitution and it needs to butt out, per the 9th and 10th.
Where do YOU see the authority to create a Department of Education?
Our country has made choices? Really? That is your argument? How many times has the USSC decided that a "choice" the country made was unconstitutional? Your argument makes no sense. It is my belief that the words in the 9th and 10th ammendments are clear.
Perhaps the will of the people will be heard...and heeded soon.
Local police and fire are county or city functions and have nothing to do with this conversation. You do know that don't you? As for agencies such as the FAA and others, I do not argue that the President can appoint cabinent officers according to Article 2, section2. My argument is that education has always been a local, state, or private affair. That the USG injection of political influence is in violation of the spirit and words of the 9th and 10th, done like it has always been done by the federal government , by buying their way in.
I must acknowledge that this is also due in a large part to the desegregation issues of the 50's and 60's IMHO. The states did not act in a rational way and the USG acted to force desegregation, creating the framework for political control of the education system. I also acknowledge that this action was necessary at the time, but that power should have been relenquished upon the completion of desegregation.
Since you added to your post I will continue...I also acknowledge that the people elected President Obama (as well as President Bush). I still believe that we have a national interest in a stable and friendly Iraq. (Look at a map.) If we are going to expend our treasure and our blood (twice), why would we knowingly allow the political landscape to return to safely harboring those that would kill us, as well as those that seek massive weapons? Would if be wise to holster our weapon and turn our back on those that have sworn to kill us?
I thought that I was clear in stating that the framework for the entry of the USG into local education was built largely on the actions taken by them to desegregate public schools during the civil rights period. I stated that that was a rightful action, and a good example of why we have an "executive" branch, to take quick and forceful action when needed. I then stated that when the need subsided, the fed should have dismantled the system and returned total local control.
I stated clearly that IMO the Department of Education was created (by Jimmy Carter) in order to apply political pressure on the states through funding. No big words there. No hidden, racist agenda. But you make up whatever you want.
We have had the Iraq discussion before. Start a new thread and if I am still allowed here tomorrow then I'll repeat myself again. I am going to bed.
Quote from: finehoe on April 16, 2010, 09:40:04 PM
Quote from: Jameson on April 16, 2010, 05:28:29 PM
But wanting our elected officials to be more fiscally responsible instead of continuing to drive our country further and further into debt while at the same time continuing to raise taxes, well, it isn't such a bad idea.
So where were they when Bush was turning a $128b surplus into $490b deficit? Why weren't they protesting then?
Bush squandered surpluses that never existed, but squander them, he did. (You did not really believe the government ever had "extra" money, did you?)
Two wars that were unneccessary have been the greatest burden, although many of my conservative brethren are not likely to agree.
On the issue of Federal "control" of education:
How have students (the presumed beneficiaries) fared since the creation of the NEA?
Better?
Worse?
Unchanged?
Quote from: NotNow on April 17, 2010, 12:38:30 AM
I would start with these two:
Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Education in the US is traditionally a local matter, and local school districts are generally the form of administration. Accreditation is generally done by private interests or a combination of districts. The entry of the ED in Jimmy Carte's administration has only served to politicize the amount and distribution of Federal money to the individual states and districts.
With a $70 billion dollar budget, and 5000 federal employees, we would be more efficient in distributing the money if we just put it our on a per capita basis and save the bureaucracy. That is, if we just continue to forget about that pesky 9th and 10th amendment.
States don't HAVE to take federal education money, you know.
http://www.youtube.com/v/rShXn-C01BU&hl=en_US&fs=1&
I love the thank you comments smug but true. If the Tea Party was really about unfair taxes Obama would be their hero.
Quote from: buckethead on April 17, 2010, 07:41:17 AM
On the issue of Federal "control" of education:
How have students (the presumed beneficiaries) fared since the creation of the NEA?
Better?
Worse
Unchanged?
This argument about constitutionality is a distraction in my humble opinion. Public schools are a failure, granted so are many parents but it has to be acknowledged that the government made a contract with parents to provide quality education for their children and they are not doing it.
QuoteFlorida Officials Fail to Provide Quality Education, Suit Claims
* Sign in to Recommend
* Twitter
* Sign In to E-Mail
* Print
* Reprints
* ShareClose
o Linkedin
o Digg
o Facebook
o Mixx
o MySpace
o Yahoo! Buzz
o Permalink
o
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 5, 2009
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) â€" The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on Thursday accusing state officials in Florida of failing to ensure that students in Palm Beach County receive a high quality education, as evidenced by their poor graduation rates.
The state court suit, filed in West Palm Beach, names Gov. Charlie Crist, the Board of Education and several political leaders and asserts that they are violating a requirement in the Florida Constitution to provide a “uniform, efficient, safe, secure and high quality†education.
“Palm Beach County is clearly not upholding its responsibility to provide a quality education to all of its students when so many of them are not graduating,†Chris Hansen, senior staff lawyer with the A.C.L.U., said Thursday in a statement.
Mr. Hansen added that the issues in Palm Beach County reflected a national problem.
A spokesman for Mr. Crist, a Republican, did not have immediate comment.
Nat Harrington, a spokesman for the Palm Beach County School District, said graduation rates had increased to 80 percent as a result of specific initiatives.
“We know we still have work today, and are focused on getting that work done,†said Mr. Harrington, who said he had not seen the lawsuit.
The suit contends that one-third to one-half of the county’s students do not graduate on time with a regular diploma, well below state and national averages, and that graduation rates varied from 56 percent to 71 percent in 2006, depending on the method used to calculate them.
The A.C.L.U. also highlighted the disparities among black, Hispanic and white student graduation rates. The gap between black and white graduation rates was 30 percentage points over the past five years, the organization stated, and 20 points between Hispanic and white students.
“All students, regardless of their age, race, special needs, ethnicity or gender, deserve an environment that breeds success, not failure,†Muslima Lewis, director of the Racial Justice Project at the A.C.L.U. of Florida, said in a statement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/us/06aclu.html
There are of course other factors which present problems, how many single income families still exist? Having a parent stay home with the kids is a luxury but the benefits are a necessity. And then of course there is the divorce rate, how is a single parent supposed to work more than full time to meet the basic needs of her (in most cases) children and check to see that the spelling homework is done? If parents are not home with their children, how can they make sure their kids aren't bullying on facebook?
My other beef with public education is the lies that are taught to children regarding our history. Oh and who can forget the establishment of a hierarchy that is supported by schools?
QuoteThe establishment of the Department of Education was in 1980. Twenty Five Years later.
Stephen, you are being disingenuous. You know full well that most school systems in the South did not even start desegregating until the 1970's at the earliest. My wife was in the Desegregation Office of the Hillsborough County School system in the middle 1970's to begin to implement school desegregation there. She helped write the plan. She had taught for years at an all black middle school in Ybor City.
That said, the Federal Dept. of Education is certainly one of those departments of the Federal government that could be abolished without being missed. Like the Tea Tasting Board (yes, it existed for decades), the time for it has passed.
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 12:05:37 AM
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 07:24:23 PM
Quote from: NotNow on April 15, 2010, 07:17:19 PM
But...But...talk to those people JC. We have been assured that they are all nincompoops, boobs, maroons, and RACISTS! Surely when you talk to them their true colors will show. Their grammar MUST be horrible!
Nope grammar is fine too. Nothing to report really. I don't support their overall position but what I am seeing is not what I've been seeing on the tv.
Our locals (at the other events that Ive covered) tend to be nicer, more sincere and more intelligent than the national rabble, thats true. Last time we went to a tea party event at the landing, the people were very nice and a credit to the rest of the movement.
It is great to hear that OUR Tea Parties are better than THEIR Tea Parties. Perhaps they nice and sincere and intelligent at the other rallies also with a few standout idiots being highlighted for media consumption. This is probably closer to the truth than the thought that the Jacksonville folks are more civil than the national "rabble".
The Department of Education was created by the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88), which was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 17, 1979 and began operating on May 16, 1980.
The full text of the law can be accessed as a PDF file here-
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/33/08/c6.pdf
And you're right about desegregation in the 70's, Dog Walker, because the schools here in Jacksonville desegregated around when I started first grade in 1972, or possibly the year before. I don't remember for sure, I was only five years old at the time. I didn't take an active interest in politics until about nine years later.
:D
QuoteJacksonvillians tend to be a civil lot, when off the highways.
:D
True enough!
Quote from: BridgeTroll on April 17, 2010, 10:19:46 AM
Quote from: stephendare on April 16, 2010, 12:05:37 AM
Quote from: JC on April 15, 2010, 07:24:23 PM
Quote from: NotNow on April 15, 2010, 07:17:19 PM
But...But...talk to those people JC. We have been assured that they are all nincompoops, boobs, maroons, and RACISTS! Surely when you talk to them their true colors will show. Their grammar MUST be horrible!
Nope grammar is fine too. Nothing to report really. I don't support their overall position but what I am seeing is not what I've been seeing on the tv.
Our locals (at the other events that Ive covered) tend to be nicer, more sincere and more intelligent than the national rabble, thats true. Last time we went to a tea party event at the landing, the people were very nice and a credit to the rest of the movement.
It is great to hear that OUR Tea Parties are better than THEIR Tea Parties. Perhaps they nice and sincere and intelligent at the other rallies also with a few standout idiots being highlighted for media consumption. This is probably closer to the truth than the thought that the Jacksonville folks are more civil than the national "rabble".
There was also a cute girl at OUR Tea Party protesting being emotionally traumatized by having to explain teabagging to her parents.
(http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/emotional-trauma.jpg)
:D
Yet more diversity...
:D
Isn't she adorable? She looks like a snarky goth Alicia Silverstone.
Absolutely! ;)
QuoteIts actually more valuable to have the point of view of an educator like your wife's, Dogwalker.
I cannot say that I know very much about the actual programming of the department of education, so it would be nice to get a grip around the department, just for civic purposes. But I doubt that she thinks that its existence violates the Constitution.
Right on both counts, Stephen. Like you I am far more troubled by the Constitutionality of the Iraq War than by the Dept. of Ed or the Tea Tasting Board. (I wonder what the Tea Party people would think about the Federal Tea Tasting Board if it still existed?)
I was pinging you for a rhetorical flourish taken too far; something we all do from time to time. ;D
QuoteLike you I am far more troubled by the Constitutionality of the Iraq War
You mean this one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
QuotePassage
An authorization by Congress was sought by President George W. Bush soon after his September 12, 2002 statement before the U.N. General Assembly asking for quick action by the Security Council in enforcing the resolutions against Iraq.[4][5]
Of the legislation introduced by Congress in response to the President Bush's requests[6], S.J.Res. 45 sponsored by Sen. Daschle & Sen. Lott was based on the original White House proposal authorizing the use of force in Iraq, H.J.Res. 114 sponsored by Rep. Hastert & Rep. Gephardt and the substantially similar S.J.Res. 46 sponsored by Sen. Lieberman were modified proposals. H.J.Res. 110 sponsored by Rep. Hastings was a separate proposal never considered on the floor. Eventually, the Hastert-Gephardt proposal became the primary legislation that Congress began to focus working on.
Introduced in Congress on October 2, 2002 in conjunction with the Administration's proposals[2][7], H.J.Res. 114 passed the House of Representatives on Thursday afternoon at 3:05 p.m. EDT on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133,[8] and passed the Senate after midnight early Friday morning at 12:50 a.m. EDT on October 11, 2002 by a vote of 77-23.[9] It was signed into law as Pub.L. 107-243 by President Bush on October 16, 2002.
United States House of Representatives
Party Ayes Nays PRES No Vote
Republican 215 6 0 2
Democratic 82 126 0 1
Independent 0 1 0 0
TOTALS 297 133 0 3
126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.
6 of 223 Republican Representatives voted against the resolution: Reps. Duncan (R-TN), Hostettler (R-IN), Houghton (R-NY), Leach (R-IA), Morella (R-MD), Paul (R-TX).
The only Independent Representative voted against the resolution: Rep. Sanders (I-VT)
Reps. Ortiz (D-TX), Roukema (R-NJ), and Stump (R-AZ) did not vote on the resolution.
United States Senate
Party Ayes Nays No Vote
Republican 48 1 0
Democratic 29 21 0
Independent 0 1 0
TOTALS 77 23 0
21 (42%) of 50 Democratic Senators voted against the resolution: Sens. Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), Wyden (D-OR).
1 of 49 Republican Senators voted against the resolution: Sen. Chafee (R-RI).
The only Independent Senator voted against the resoution: Sen. Jeffords (I-VT)
Just because they pass a law doesn't mean it's Constitutional. Has the Supreme Court refused to hear a case regarding the legality of the war yet?
I don't know enough about the legalities of war powers granted to the government to have any sort of informed opinion, but the whole presumed preemptive strike thing on Iraq makes me uneasy as a precedent.
QuoteJust because they pass a law doesn't mean it's Constitutional.
I think that was someones point a couple pages ago... :)
Well a good point bears repeating! (and I need to cover up that I hadn't read the beginning of the thread. LOL!)
Quote from: Dog Walker on April 17, 2010, 11:57:12 AM
Well a good point bears repeating! (and I need to cover up that I hadn't read the beginning of the thread. LOL!)
And that proves you're a good sport. Don't feel too bad, I don't
remember the very beginning of the thread and don't really want to re-read it. I think it's just somebody saying they planned to take some pictures.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4019/4531396092_0a4564b514.jpg)
I am not big on taking photos of signs but this one cracked me up!
I like your avatar pic JC lol
Quote from: Sportmotor on April 18, 2010, 08:44:04 PM
I like your avatar pic JC lol
Are you laughing with, or at me?
with