And it begins...
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=186688
Printed Date: 12 December 2025 at 4:04pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: And it begins...
Posted By: stratoaxe
Subject: And it begins...
Date Posted: 13 September 2010 at 11:37pm
|
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/delaware-senate-race-kamikaze-republican-tea-party/story?id=11627467 - The Tea Party starts single handedly derailing a promising Republican season.
I was afraid this kind of stuff was going to start popping up. All the distaste for President Obama, founded and unfounded alike, has really given rise to alot of conservative thinking that we didn't see even during Bush's term.
But from the beginning I've been preaching that the Tea Party was going to rise up in a fit of misguided egotism and pull a Ross Perot. They have just enough followers to sap the Republican vote, and just enough haters that they don't (thankfully) have a snowball's chance in Mexico to actually win anything.
The thinking behind this woman's very political existence is radical-as far as I'm concerned, a Republican is a Republican. Just because he's pro abortion and pro gun control means he represents the thinking of the people in that state. If that's what the people want, and that's what they've been happy with, an attempt at derailing the system is both suicidal and arrogant. As a conservative, I recognize that in winning war, you may have to white flag some battles. The Tea Party somehow doesn't think this is valid reasoning, and I've been saying all along that their radical, revolutionary way of thinking was going to be their downfall.
No matter how relevant or right you think you are, you're still subject to the will of the people. That's the catch of American politics. I love guns, and I'll fight for my right to own them (poltically of course), but if 80% of the country decided that guns weren't necessary, there'd be no cause left fighting for. And that's regarding my strongest political conviction-I value my second amendment right above every other issue except speech and religion. It's the reason I stay conservative in a time where conservatives are being labeled along with nutjobs like many in the Tea Party ranks.
America is not a country of revolution. It's a country of slow, steady change. You move the sails, not the boat.
So how many of you guys think this going to be a trend, or just an isolated incident?
|
Replies:
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 8:39am
|
Do you like Olympia Snowe as a republican? Based on your above statements, I would say you do.And that is why you are wrong. She is the antithesis of a conservative government.
Face the facts, the country has tried keynesian economics. It was and is a utter failure. (even though the President can't seem to grasp just how bad it is, and wants to SPEND MORE)...
The country needs fiscal conservatives, and a shift towards the right. Not a shift towards the center...
We went hard left in 2006. And again in 2008 HARD LEFT.
So, using your boating analogy, The ship is about to tip over to the left, with massive debt, and huge entitlement programs (obamacare, free housing just stop paying your mortgage)... Righting the boat won't come from a shift towards the middle... The boat would still capsize in a wave.
We HAVE To move hard right for a while to get the boat sailing correctly...
Anything less, will keep us in the mess we are currently in, and the turmoil will cause years of uncertainty.
And uncertainty leads to high unemployment, every single time.
Methinks you should look at some other news sites besides the left stream media. This is a good thing... The republican party has ignored their base for too long. And the base is ready to put a smack down on them when they try any junk this season. ------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: ArthurBignose
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 8:52am
|
None of that matters because if the Tea Party is splitting Republican votes, without a chance in hell of splitting Democrat votes, basically you're giving the election to the Dems. Take a look at history to see how this will turn out. During the election of 1912 the Bull Moose party effectively split the vote with Republicans and allowed a Democrat to win. Voters are probably upset enough with the current situation that the Tea Party might get a significant amount of votes for a third party, but in the end they will NOT secure all of the Republicans votes (not mine at least) and will secure a defeat for the Republicans as well. ------------- |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:08am
|
It is a primary... with ONE winner...
You guys are acting like the tea party is starting a third party or something...
They aren't.
You guys also said there was no way Chris Christie would win... Too conservative... Or many others.
The silent majority is silent no longer. A few "centrists" will not vote, but that will in no way give the massive amount of Democrats who are now unemployed... a reason to head to the polls...
This election will be a bloodbath for democrats. Even the left stream media see's it... hence them trying to gin up something... anything to pin on the tea party.
They should just stick to calling us racist...
Sad thing is, you guys are buying into it...
and it is a primary.
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:15am
|
Polls indicate that if she wins the primary, that she has no chance of winning the overall election. If she doesn't win the seat, there is virtually no way the Republicans can win the senate majority. It will be interesting to see what happens. I would imagine if the Tea Party could be fingered as the causation of the overall loss of the Senate, it would be the death knell of the movement. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: GroupB
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:18am
| What's really sad is that you actually think you are a majority |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:35am
Here is a graph of the election in 2008. Red Republican, Blue Democrat...
 Here is a graph showing states in Budget crisis. The larger the dot, the worse the crisis... Notice anything similar between the two?
 ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
GroupB wrote:Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:48am
|
In the last few elections, America has given the Keys to the car to the "intellectual elite" the brilliant educators of our country, who pride themselves on good intentions, while ignoring discipline, fiscal or otherwise. While the blatherskite media promoted a puzzlewit to lead the house.
This has brought us economic ruin... And as usual when faced with distruction, the workers of a society wake up, look around, and make changes.
The tea party is the best thing to happen to this country in a long time. And since there is no leader, just a set of goals. It can't be stopped by an election... It changed HOW we drive the car into the future. As the PEOPLE will drive instead of the media, and political elites... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:26am
|
The bottom line for me is what Arthur said. Way back when the Tea Party movement got started I predicted this would happen (not that it took a rocket scientist...), even though all of those who supported the tea party claimed they'd never send candidates up.
If they keep this up, they'll split the party. Also, which forumers' accounts are Arthur and GroupB? |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:32am
I was originally thinking PP, but the attempts at logical argumentation aren't quite as effective and the smart-butt level is a little higher so now I'm not sure. ------------- 
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:35am
|
I thought Arthur was PP, but it seems as though he/she just claimed Republican.
GroupB for sure isn't PP. |
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:08am
PP has claimed on several occasions to be fairly conservative, and has argued in favor of conservative values against FE at times. Hell, he thinks that The Wealth of Nations is one of the most important and/or influential economic texts in modern history, and has argued Adam Smith's principles of economics on this board for sure on numerous occasions. He just seemed so liberal because he would argue, in the interest of clarifying things or just because his opponents were wrong I guess, against the silly things that OS and FE constantly purported. I imagine PP is fairly similar to Tallen in most significant ways. I don't think that PP is posting right now, though.
I find it funny that you cite history as evidence that Keynesian economics doesn't work, and then advocate conservative principles (which I assume is equivalent to free-market principles, yeah?) of economics, as if history hasn't shown that free-market capitalism doesn't create an exorbitant amount of wealth and power concentration that is hardly conducive to a healthy society or economy. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:13am
-------------
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:38am
|
I love how FE always rags on Keynesian economic theory. It helped put our country at the forefront of the world's economic powers from the mid '40's through the early '70's. And while it fell out of favor during the economic stagnation of the 1970's, there were other socio-economic factors that played far bigger roles in that issue than the mixing of the free market and public regulation.
Keynesian economics isn't what brought us to this point economically. In fact, it was the opposite, the unfettering of big banking through deregulation, which allowed our economy to become over inflated. I honestly don't think we're going to see a "double dip" recession, but growth and recovery will be slow since the infrastructure wasn't there to support the kind of economy we thought we had in the 2000's in the first place. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 12:12pm
|
Funny, the states (as a general rule) with a small population, very little tax revenue, less infrastructure and fewer urban centers aren't in debt. Oh wait, that's regular old economics, and not directly related to politics. Keynesian economics do work. There is certainly an issue with overspending (which is not what Keynesian economics is about), but using debt to bolster economic growth works. The issue is that it has to be balanced by paying off that debt when there's lots of money in the pot. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 5:13pm
They kind of are. As it says the candidate the tea party is backing seems to have no chance to beat a democrat in Delaware. The one they aren't backing can. If the one they are backing wins the primary, they just lose to the democrats, it stays a democratic seat. Note: I have read nothing about this except this article. ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 7:31pm
|
So you guys are seriously upset that the tea party is against Mike Castle...
Have you looked at his voting record?...
Do you consider him a "republican"?
He voted FOR cap and tax, and has said he will vote for it again in the Senate...
He voted FOR TARP, and supports further stimulus...
Pro abortion too.
He looks to me to be a RINO...
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes.xpd?year=2010&person=400070 - http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes.xpd?year=2010&person=400070
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 8:13pm
|
And again, if O'Donnel wins the primary and loses the seat, isn't that worse? Sometimes you have to play the odds. I'm pro choice. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:05pm
|
That is why they play the game... I don't assume one candidate will for sure do anything... Making a determination based on "what if's" and forgetting your principles seems to be silly. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 9:25pm
| God FE, even when I agree with you I find my self disagreeing with your reasons for thinking that way. The tea party showed promise, hell, it got Scott Brown elected in MA (I personally think Scott Brown got Scott Brown elected, Martha Coakley helped, but let's go with that). He's a relatively moderate Republican, does his best to carry out the wishes of his constituents, and was brutally attacked by Tea Party types as soon as he voted to budget our roads for the rest of the year. I'd love for there to be a movement that mainly focused on fiscal responsibility and minimal government control over citizens lives, since I lean pretty Libertarian, but you and the rest of the Ultra-Right have lumped in abortion, gay marriage, and a variety of other stupid issues that are driving away the moderates needed to have any positive public impact. Hell, you're calling Castle a RINO, and speaking of the "silent majority". Your very posts are a detriment to the success of your movement since not only are you tying the Tea Party endorsement to being re-branded Republicans, but Nixon's "silent majority" is usually translated to "closet racists". It's people like you who give the Tea Party a bad name. If anything, your idea of what it stands for is for even more ultra-right wing conservatives instead of a party that attracts the growing number of independent voters, enough with the culture wars. I know they politically expedient to drawing voter turnout by being polarizing, but a commitment to being more moderate could potentially bring out the voters(usually a majority) who don't typically vote at all. I know plenty of liberal college students who voted for Scott Brown in an off-year election, it can be done. However, in all likelyhood it won't because too many in the media are willing to sensationalize the movement for their own political/financial gain in a sick vicious cycle of being branded as extremist wackos by the left, then the right countering it by rallying the "base" by swinging even harder to the right. TR lost the 1912 election, despite taking a bullet during a speech and soldiering on, which should have given him enough of a "bullet bump" for its sheer badassery. If we want to get the will of the majority enacted legislatively, we need a viable 3rd party to force coalition governments and compromise. Unfortunately there are too many hard-liners with deep passions and deep pockets who will attack anyone for compromise. You could have solid Republican credentials but be in favor of background checks for gun purchases, and get run out of town on a rail. The right it seems, even more so than the left, would rather be ideologically pure and lose honestly than compromise and win. After all, the rapture is eminent. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:10pm
|
The tea party is about taxed enough already. so a vote for tarp would be a no-no.
Also a vote for cap and tax would be a HUGE no-no...
That is why the tea party stood up against him, and the Republican party.
The other stuff is my personal concerns. I can't personally support any candidate that promotes killing children.
"life, liberty and the persuit of happiness"...
If that makes me a "racist" in your eyes... That would be your problem... But, the majority of children killed by abortion are black... (food for thought). ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:15pm
|
Fox just called it... Castle is gone.
This applies...
http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/2010/09/tea-party-express-statement-we-take-issue-with-delaware-reporting/ - http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/2010/09/tea-party-express-statement-we-take-issue-with-delaware-reporting/
Tea Party Express Issues Election Day Statement on Delaware U.S. Senate Race (WILMINGTON) — The Tea Party Express issued the following statement today regarding the U.S. Senate race in Delaware: “As voters head to the polls in Delaware today, the news media and many in the political establishment have sought to cast tonight’s election returns as a lose-lose proposition for the tea party movement. “If Conservative Republican Christine O’Donnell wins, the news media and political elite insist that this will be a loss for the Tea Party movement, as it will surely mean a win for the Democrats in November, and increase their chances for retaining a majority in the U.S. Senate. “But wait, if Liberal RINO Mike Castle wins, the news media and political elite similarly insist that this will be a loss for the Tea Party movement, as it will mean the establishment has defeated the Tea Party-backed candidate. “So under the logic of those in the media and the political establishment, the Tea Party movement loses either way. Nice try, but we at the Tea Party Express aren’t buying this narrative. “The Tea Party Express, Gov. Sarah Palin, the Independence Hall Tea Party PAC, and Diamond State Tea Party all endorsed Christine O’Donnell because she best represented the principles important to the Tea Party movement: limited government and a return to the constitutional principles this country was founded on, but which our political leaders have increasingly strayed from. “It used to be the accepted notion that primaries were about allowing voters in a political party to support the best candidate who represented the members of that party. Now, however, we’re told voters are stupid if they don’t instead play the role of political strategist and support candidates based on a political chess game, regardless of their principles. “We here at the Tea Party Express trust the voters to follow their hearts and to stick to their principles and beliefs. When Ronald Reagan waged his campaign for president in the 1980 election cycle, the same political elitists and journalists who are deriding Christine O’Donnell as ‘unelectable’ similarly sneered that an ‘extremist’ like Reagan could never be elected. As a result, John Anderson from Illinois was egged on to offer a more ‘reasonable’ choice in the general election campaign. Reagan won, Anderson and Jimmy Carter lost, and the political elite and journalists had egg on their faces. “Supporting the most liberal Republican Member of Congress, Mike Castle, is not a viable option for constitutional conservatives. Those who have urged support for Castle do so from the most crass and soulless political calculation where principles are irrelevant, as it is a zero sum gain. “We’ve tried this route of electing Republicans to government who didn’t believe in their own party’s platform, when we had a Republican Congress and a Republican in the White House. What we got was massive spending, higher deficits, bailouts, and a significant increase in the size, scope, and power of the government. “We here in Tea Party movement are trying to change the nature of our leaders in Washington, and that means dumping failed and corrupt politicians like Mike Castle who trade their votes based on the campaign contributions of well-heeled lobbyists or the arm twisting of political party leaders. This is the very reason Mike Castle has attempted to hold at least four positions on ObamaCare – because at each time his primary concern was not what was good for this nation, but what was good for Mike Castle’s political ambitions. “When term-limited Governor Castle wanted to prolong his career feeding off the public trough, and remaining a member of the ruling class, he orchestrated ‘The Switch’ with Democrat Congressman Tom Carper that would allow both of them to retain their political power. It was all about their egos and their power, and the same motivation for Mike Castle continues to this day. “Mike Castle and his political henchmen continue this crass and shameless behavior to this day. This year, the Delaware GOP establishment – led by Mike Castle’s closest allies and advocates – deliberately chose to not field a Republican candidate for Attorney General in the state of Delaware. Why? Because the Democrat Attorney General is a man named Beau Biden, who happens to be the son of Democrat Vice President, Joe Biden. “But don’t worry say Castle’s Republican supporters. If he wins the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate in Delaware we’re supposed to expect him to suddenly become some kind of Republican loyalist, helping to advance a conservative revolution in Congress. “We here at the Tea Party Express don’t buy that for one minute. Whether it means switching political parties, or voting with the Democrats on more bailouts, Cap & Trade, or for liberal judicial activists for the U.S. Supreme Court, Mike Castle will play to the same political puppet masters he always has, and that’s not to Republicans, conservatives, or his constituents. “The Tea Party Express has won nearly every election it has played an active role in. Today, the voters of Delaware will decide whether to support the Tea Party Express-backed candidate, Christine O’Donnell. If they do, that will be a victory for the Tea Party movement, no matter how many pundits or journalists try and argue otherwise. “The next step is to fight on behalf of these Tea Party candidates in November, and ensure that they once again defy the wishes and predictions of the political establishment, by propelling these constitutional conservatives to victory over their liberal Democrat, big-government opponents. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:24pm
|
The thing is, none of use are baffled as to why the Tea Party doesn't like the candidate...he's a pro gun, pro choice Republican.
But if they know the odds are very much against them winning in that state, isn't it better to at least have the seat? This seems more like causing division and reforming the party at the most crucial time in the game. And aloooot of us were counting on the game change. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:25pm
|
The republican party has just stated that they will not help her AT ALL with her campaign. Zero money from the republican party as they don't want to support her at all.
So much for "big tent" republicans... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 10:52pm
If by majority, you mean less than roughly half the children aborted by white mothers, then you would be right. census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/tables/10s0099.pdf If the link doesnt work cause I am posting from my cellphone, google abortion race statistics. Should be the second link. Also I find it ironic that the left is being refered to as elitist yet the person making such claims has made multiple references to a jouralism degree... Not in this thread but others. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:01pm
|
I'll just leave this here...
http://www.blackgenocide.org/home.html - http://www.blackgenocide.org/home.html
With 1/3 of all abortions performed on Black women, the abortion industry has received over 4,000,000,000 (yes, billion) dollars from the Black community.
Since 1973 there has been over 13 million Black children killed and their precious mothers victimized by the U.S. abortion industry.
Between 1882 and 1968, 3,446 Blacks were lynched in the U.S. That number is surpassed in less than 3 days by abortion. 1,784 African-American children are killed each day by the heinous act of abortion. 3 out of 5 pregnant African-American women will abort their child. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:06pm
|
Not supporting Castle I can understand, but what's w/ fielding such wingnut candidates if you're just about lower taxes and reduced government spending? Reid should be unseated, but his opponent seems even more out there than Ron Paul. Discussing getting rid of the Dept. of Ed is going to brand you a nutjob and annoy a very powerful lobby, doing it w/o suggesting an alternative in a time when our school are falling behind is even worse. You need better candidates, and I'm afraid there are too many in the movement who would rip apart one based on more socially-based criteria, and that the more level-headed potential candidates see this as a flash in the pan movement and won't get involved. The Tea Party needs a face who is trustworthy and not polarizing, and something resembling a platform, or they will continue to be defined by their opponents. Personally I'd like to see: -Pay as you go -Bills actually posted for the public to read before a vote (unlike healthcare reform) -Congressional Term limits, possibly just consecutive term limits - Get ballsy and cut the big pork, military spending -Learn from the woman's suffrage movement, work at the state level to gain a foothold, case-studies, and congressional votes before going national -Stop branding "progressive" as a dirty word. Some progressive era reforms are considerably appealing to small gov't types, like recall and referendum. The fear mongering needs to stop. The way to counter emotionally-charged debates is to look like the rational one, it got Obama elected by appearing to be slightly above the theater -Lastly, get real. The movement relies heavily on keeping both taxes and spending, low. Our debt is just too huge, and populace already too dependent to do both w/o causing a great deal of harm. A "value added" tax, or a return to a tax on stock market transaction (pennies on the dollar add up quick with high-volume electronic trading) could raise much-needed revenue. Failing that, we need to do the unthinkable and nationalize our oil reserves or something drastic. I fear that in hopes of getting elected, tea partiers will continue to make silly promises and attack their opposition for even suggesting any type of tax increase. Boehner is probably going to get it for suggesting letting the tax cuts expire for the wealthy, which is prudent. The Tea Party likes to thin of itself as being descended from the Revolution, while their historical view may be somewhat warped, the original movement resembled an angry mob until it found good, practical and level-headed representatives, and turned on them for being so on numerous occasions. Sanity winning this one will be more difficult since we have better media, and the right to vote isn't limited to 10% of the adult population like in the early republic. |
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:09pm
|
Right, because I am going to trust the imaginary statistics off a religious anti-abortion website versus the united states census. Also your website only address one of the two races being discussed. If those imaginary numbers are infact real, one could easily double them to see the caucasian numbers. |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:13pm
|
Oh God
------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: GroupB
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:14pm
| FE, since when is 1/3 a majority? Learn to basic math. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:19pm
|
Sorry... I was thinking based on percentages...
currently Blacks make up 14% of the population of America... And they account for 1/3 of the TOTAL of all abortions...
that was my point... But, it is late, and I'm tired. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:21pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:25pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:35pm
Link? If true, I have an issue with this as it comes across as the national party ignoring the wishes of their constituents (like whiny little brats) just because they didn't get their way. Which, it seems to me, would indicate the perhaps the GOP doesn't really believe in representative government. -------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 14 September 2010 at 11:55pm
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100915/ap_on_el_ge/us_primary_rdp - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100915/ap_on_el_ge/us_primary_rdp
Second paragraph. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 12:19am
|
Then I definitely have issues with that and the Retardigans deserve to lose any elections where they fail to support the candidates wanted by the people. Will this hurt the nation in the short run? Possibly. But one of the things this nation is founded on is the concept that we have a government of the people . . . not of the political party bureaucrats. It seems that at least one of the major political parties has forgotten that and some house-cleaning is in order. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 1:08am
He was very pro tarp when it came around. ------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 5:21am
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 7:31am
Ah, the hypocrite tag...
So fresh and new.
Pro tip: When a primary is decided for a party, the party should support the choice of the PEOPLE.
Not the choice of the party.
The thing that ticks me off to no end is the way the republican party leadership (who that is, I am not sure) who DURING HER ACCEPTANCE speech come out and say they will not support her with ONE dollar.
Did that have to do with their polling numbers they just picked up from 30 seconds before?...
Obviously not.
The Republican party put up another "democrat" and figured that the people would just fall in line.
How well did that work with McCain? I know tons of people that didn't vote in that Presidential election because of McCain and the fact that he was Obama light.
Guess what, those people are sick of having one party the democrats and the democrats light.
Whoever is directing the republican party to make moves like cutting off support TO THEIR OWN CANDIDATE. Before ANY polls are even done... Those people should be fired. They have no business in politics.
There is a whole side of politics that the left stream media, and the political parties don't understand. This election will have consequences just like the last one. Part of those consequences is for republican party leadership to start standing up for principles instead of blowing in the wind. That is what the party needs... A backbone with a foundation in character.
But with moves like what they did after Castle got his rear kicked... They still clearly don't get it. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 8:01am
|
speaking of people with no clue...
Joy (no relation to someone happy) Behar got DESTROYED in this clip.
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=hdkUnzqGkU - http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=hdkUnzqGkU
to funny. Guess he won't be back on her show... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 9:54am
|
Since you ignored my post like always. -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 10:04am
I ignored this because it makes you look dumb...
But, sense you pushed it. I will respond. The tea party isn't a person. It is clearly a anti tax and waste movement. Focusing on Constitutional principles and smaller government.
To try (pretty lamely I might add) to pin this on the other Glenn is pathetic at best.
If you want to put in on anyone it would have to be Rick Santelli (MSNBC guy who called for the party at the beginning)...
And beck was for tarp because he thought the entire system would collapse without it.
Now we are all playing in funny money... (check out the deficit for proof of this). So everything is uncharted waters anyway...
And what do democrats and the leaders of the republican party want? More of the same.
The tea party forces real change. Back to conservatism. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 10:26am
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 10:34am
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 10:36am
|
Beck was elected to what?...
Beck is the voice of which party?...
Last I checked he was a pundit. Just like Chris Matthews, or Keith Olbermann... You guys are being dumb with this line of thinking.
HE IS NOT A CANDIDATE FOR ANYTHING...
Let's get back to the topic now, shall we?
http://biggovernment.com/kbyrne/2010/09/15/hey-gop-lead-follow-or-get-out-of-the-way/ - http://biggovernment.com/kbyrne/2010/09/15/hey-gop-lead-follow-or-get-out-of-the-way/
I'd say a lot of people agree with this sentiment... If it comes out that Steele was the one who pulled the support for O'Donnel during her acceptance speech... He should finally be replaced.
I have little to no faith in that guy to "lead" the GOP. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 10:58am
|
But you criticize a candidate and admonish anyone that thought to support him because he voted for TARP funding, but when your idol and soulmate supports it, it's ok. Again... Hypocrite much? ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 11:04am
100% agreement on this.
Overall a good post. Minimal interpretation and histrionics on the part of the poster with good supporting information. Who are you and where is the real FE?  -------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 11:11am
|
Well, Christine O'Donnell won. And so it begins. TAKE IT FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS! ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 11:29am
|
-------------
|
Posted By: SSOK
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 12:18pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 12:26pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 12:33pm
Let's hope your political predictions are better than your economic ones:
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 1:04pm
|
let's hope... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 1:25pm
Rush must read T&O because he had a whole segment about "big tent" republicans and this issue...
The republican party listened... And quickly back pedaled.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/15/republican-establishment-pledges-support-odonnell-infighting/ - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/15/republican-establishment-pledges-support-odonnell-infighting/
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 1:56pm
That was in reference to Cap and trade passing... Which it didn't... Because of the tea party...
Oh, and Castle VOTED FOR cap and tax.
And said he would vote for it again in the senate.
You guys must have missed that point I made earlier.
That alone should prove he is an Obama-Republican. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 2:01pm
|
^^^ No it wasn't. Further proves that you can't be taken seriously if you can't even remember the crap you spew forth. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 2:22pm
ORLY?
so, cap and tax fell short (passed the house, but not enough votes in the senate. So instead they used the disaster in the gulf to impliment part of the new "cap and tax" penalties to oil companies that were planned in Cap and tax...
"Never let a crisis go to waste".
But, that had nothing to do with cap and tax?
Keep fishing. They are completely tied together. Just like Obama didn't want to drill but the public was forcing his hand... So he said he would allow drilling... A few weeks later the spill happens and he changes his mind overnight.
Of course it is part of the same tax philosophy...
You want more? Cause I have it...
The EPA is also enacting cap and tax rules (even though it didn't pass) using their power to regulate DUST. Also something covered in the cap and tax. Is that related as well? Of course, even though the legislation hasn't passed the President is using all of his tricks to do what he wants.
Costing Americans money and jobs.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/14/coal-miners-say-environmental-rules-killing-jobs-hard-hit-appalachia/ - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/14/coal-miners-say-environmental-rules-killing-jobs-hard-hit-appalachia/
"since a wave of environmental regulation has put his firm's other permits on hold.
"Unless we can get a permit, we can't extend the job no farther," he said. "Right now, I don't know if I can make it or not." Fox, who is married and has three kids, was among the hundreds of Appalachian miners who rallied in Washington, D.C., Wednesday in a bid to pressure the Obama administration to loosen restrictions on coal mining in their states. They say the rules amount to a de facto freeze on a chunk of the industry, jeopardizing jobs in one of the most economically depressed parts of the country. Since last year, The Environmental Protection Agency has stepped up regulation on mountaintop coal mining across six Appalachian states because the explosives that are used to remove mountain surfaces send debris into rivers and streams, endangering the environment." You know what regulations they are talking about?... DUST... Which is covered in Cap and tax. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 2:27pm
|
It wasn't related to the Cap and Trade bill. Try again. Oh, and Summer came and is almost gone. Never even broke $3.00 that I remember. Your crystal ball is broken.------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 3:05pm
Taxes rates - federal, state and local - were at their lowest points since the 1950s in 2009.
You mean like outlawing abortion and homosexual marriage? |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 15 September 2010 at 3:42pm
El oh el. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 8:56am
|
Guess we need to enlighten Whale and jmac that the President has said numerous times that he will let the bush tax cuts expire.
IF that happens, it will be the LARGEST TAX INCREASES IN HISTORY...
http://www.lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&SubSectionID=9&ArticleID=11848 - http://www.lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&SubSectionID=9&ArticleID=11848
When someone thinks of their taxes, it isn't only the taxes they are paying NOW that they consider... It is future taxes as well.
As a business owner, I would wait to buy equipment (where I would need to hire employee's to run said equipment) if I felt that my expenses might be going up (taxes are expenses).
ESPECIALLY in the current economic situation where pricing is extremely difficult. If I can't raise my prices to offset the added cost of new taxes... Then my margins drop further... And trust me, when you are talking about 1-3% profitablity (average among printers, not my actual figures...) any change in expenses is a HUGE deal.
Anyway I think that finishes off that arguement.
Let's get back to the point of this thread.
Remember when everyone said Charlie Crist was the ONLY one who was "electable" in Florida... But, he got beat by the tea party candidate?
Well, well, well...
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68E55P20100915 - http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68E55P20100915
"Six weeks before November 2 congressional elections, Rubio leads state Governor Charlie Crist, an independent, by 40 percent to 26 percent among likely voters, the poll found. Democrat Kendrick Meek trails at 21 percent."
The media doesn't realize how ticked off the majority of America is right now...
Many voted for change in the last election... But, got more of the same. Time to try something very different. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 9:50am
|
Rush nails it... (btw, was that a nose pick?... in the video)
Also, I have been reading that Rove was involved with Castle (probably in a paid position...) Conflict of interest?... Now this type of thing happens daily on regular media, but if he gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar on fox. I bet... he will be gone.
His comments on fox were repeated in just about every story I read concerning the "unexpected" results of the primary. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 11:09am
If it hasn't happened yet, how can they claim to be taxed enough already? -------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 11:15am
fail
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 11:59am
Fine, let's pretend they are taxed enough already. Where was all this complaint during Bush's term? It doesn't follow that people were complacent with what they had for eight years, but are now taxed enough to warrant such disdain for our current tax policies. The TEA Party is either highly partisan to be worried about taxes during a democrat's administration, or they don't actually feel taxed enough already, and are just moving to prevent an increase in taxes. -------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 12:13pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 12:55pm
Have you ever wondered why those tax cuts were made with an expiration date to start with?
I dare say that letting a cut expire - as it was designed to do - does not equate to a pure increase. Not only that, to what level does the "OMG BIGGEST EVER" have anything to do with the rate of taxes as compared to past times? Will letting the Bush cuts expire bring the levels back to what it was in the 1950s, or any other historical level of high taxes? Also, for which income bracket is this the largest increase in history? And finally, you avoided answering the question: Exactly what is small government about banning homosexual marriage and abortion?
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 12:59pm
There is a Democrat in the White House. Who cares that tax rates are at their lowest points in modern history and that the "MASSIVE INCREASES" are due to the expiration of a tax postponement plan that was designed to expire anyway, they are "Taxed enough!" |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 1:08pm
|
Also. My honest thoughts on the Tea Party: The Tea Party slithered out of the afterbirth of Republican whining after Obama was elected. It's an astroturfed movement created by the wealthy who are terrified that the big bad Democrat might lower their profit margins by .05 percent through his policies. So they got the Republicans to kick the hive and move as far-right as possible, using every weapon they posses along the way - Fox News, lies, etc. Now they have hoards of supporters who don't know any better than to repeat what the loud voices have told them - Health care reform is bad! Obama is turning this nation into dependent socialists! Taxation is out of control! - even though the things they are blindly supporting hurt them. It's like Stockholm Syndrome. The wealthy that created the faux-outrage don't care about them. And now, it's snowballed into a force that the Republicans cannot control. And true fiscal Republicans - the Tallens and Rebs of the world - cannot associate with them. The wealthy got step one of what they wanted to get out of it. So, I guess in that category, the party has been a success. It's just ironic to me that the average support of the Tea Party has no idea how that actually sets them back. /In before OMG YOU JOURNALIST!.
|
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 2:10pm
Yes, but look at my argument again. I'm saying there are two possible reasons for why the TEA party are so outraged at...whatever it is that they are angry about: 1) They aren't actually angry about current tax rates because they were essentially the same under Bush. This leads me to believe they are angry about the party of the current administration and a large part of the TEA party movement don't care so much about taxation policy (from which it follows that they don't feel as if they are 'taxed enough already' because they don't feel much of anything). Thus, this is just partisan bickering brought on by the economically-elite trying to protect their interests and prevent the tax rates from being raised. 2) They are legitimately unhappy with current tax levels, and do want change, in addition to preventing the tax cut expiration. That's fine. This begs the question, though, why were they so complacent under Bush if the tax rates are the same? The movement, due to their lack of action under Bush and explosion of activism under Obama, again comes across as partisan. So, either they don't feel 'taxed enough already' (and just want to keep the status quo more or less), or they are a partisan movement fueled by the democrats having power. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 2:19pm
If you pay more, whatever you want to call it, it is still an increase. -------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 2:27pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 2:30pm
OMG YOU JOURNALIST! -------------
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 2:36pm
Quick, get out a broader brush. You're gonna need it to paint all of us poor individuals the same shade. ------------- 
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 3:26pm
|
47% of Americans don't pay taxes. The top 1% of tax returns paid 40.4% of the taxes. The top 25% of returns paid 86.59% of the taxes. It sure is a good thing that you guys militantly hate those rich bastards for protecting their "miniscule .05%" bottom line. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 3:38pm
You stated it nicer than I would have. I see those stats and rather than thinking of the rich protecting their "miniscule .05%" I think of all the whining from the people protecting their right to freeload off of others. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 3:39pm
|
Mack, just throwing this out there as it has no basis in truth/reality. Would Pelosi have said something so stupid if there wasn't such a ridiculous amount of all Republicans wanting to shut down any health care reform by Obama? What if Republicans actually wanted to work for something rather than threatening to filibuster. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 3:47pm
|
^^^ Actually, Pelosi is a lot like Biden and Quayle. She says stupid things all the time for no apparent reason.
-------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 3:49pm
|
lol true.
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:04pm
Because conservatives control the dialogue thanks to the state of media in this country, you missed the ass-half of that quote, which is " . . . away from the fog of the controversy." Not saying it wasn't a crappy way to state what she was saying. But she didn't say that it should be passed without knowing what was in it.
Quite a few people also thought we'd get legitimate healthcare reform, hoping that Democrats in this country would grow a pair and not kowtow to 23 percenters, obstructionists and the insurance lobby. But because the large majority of Democrats in this country are worthless, we ended up with this hodgepodge mess of a bill. Is it going to be as bad as Republicans are saying? Probably not. But it's not a good reform. You won't hear me defend it.
Sigh. I thought this soundbite got cleared up. One, Healthcare is already rationed. That is what the insurance company does. It rations health care for money. Two, there is already widespread abuse of the system. Unless you support turning people away from the ER if they cannot show proof of ability, this will never go away either. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:06pm
|
Watching Americans go at each others' throats over healthcare is funny.
------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:06pm
And how much of the wealth of the country is controlled by the top one percent, and top 25 percent, respectively? |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:09pm
Ok. Call it an increase if you want to. But it was a planned increase. Again, the tax cuts were built with an expiration date for a reason. The money we missed out on due to those cuts was meant to be recouped later.
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:10pm
Youre right, we should just spread it all out so that everyone has an equal share. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:13pm
No, really. If you are going to bring up those percentage levels as a point, then you should probably be honest with the numbers. How much of the wealth in the U.S. is controlled by the top one percent and 25 percents, respectively? |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:17pm
|
As of 2004 the top 1% accounted for 24% of the weath, but are covering 40% of the taxes. Top 5% accounted for 57% of the weath. Not sure on top 25%. Do 53% of Americans account for 100% of the wealth? ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:19pm
I've heard the full quote, I still have a problem with it. There was controversy because of fear of what was in it. The correct approach is to determine what is exactly in it to see if it is controversial, not to pass it and then find out what's in it afterwards because the controversy has been rendered moot by passing it. -------------
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:23pm
I suppose we are interpreting what she said differently. I didn't take "Find out what's in it" to mean literally what the ink on paper said. I took it to mean the practical application of the thing once it starts working. Again, it was a bad way to say it. And she is not good using words in good ways.
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:24pm
These are not connected in the way you think they are connected.
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:27pm
It's connected in a more powerful way, if anything. The tax bracket system is not fair. They are already paying more money, it's only the people wanting a spreading of wealth that think giving wealthier people higher percentage taxes is fair. If you got rid of the tax brackets, the top X% of people would still pay a higher percentage of the national tax returns every year than the other groups, it would just be fair. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:27pm
Don't pull an FE on us. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:39pm
What? I was simply stating that the percentage in which they pay and the percentage that they control - right now - is not at some crazy egregious level. I inferred your "but" to mean that it was that. I apologize if that came off as combative.
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 16 September 2010 at 5:40pm
Because they have more money. This is simple.
They would pay a - considerably - smaller amount based on income (Which is why they created the Tea Party movement). And those who cannot afford to pay the same level taxation as those with billions would be hurt quite a bit. I suppose we have different views of "fair" though.
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 12:25am
Out of curiosity, where does your point of view draw the line of fair? Who is any one person, or group of people to decide how much someone else should be allowed to earn? Sounds like a slippery slope to me. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 2:19am
Yes, Fox is the "BIG BAD NEWS AGENCY" because they are right-leaning instead of left... ...because Democrats don't use CNN and MSNBC in the EXACT same way Hypocrisy is funny. Especially blind hypocrisy. ------------- 
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 3:21am
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 8:02am
|
I have to admit some ignorance for past taxation levels and did some looking at the info given in Wiki. WTH? There was a high of 91% at one point. Historically, there were common rates for the rich at 74%! Threre must have been massive loopholes in the tax codes ore something, I can't imagine all these people were really paying these types of rates. It just doesn't seem possible. Further, I can't imagine how if they were, we were able to have such a massive growing economy. Or am I missing something? ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 8:09am
|
I love how certain segments of the population think it is OK to promote class warfare. Guess, it is OK to steal from the rich guy down the street... He can "afford" it. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 8:24am
I'd have to disagree with you there. I don't like either one, but MSNBC is worse than CNN to a FOX-level bias. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 17 September 2010 at 8:33am
Could very well be true, I pay very little attention to msnbc, and as mentioned, I'm not exactly unbias myself ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |