Tea Party

[Jarod]

Tea Pary = Republican marketing plan set up by Republican insiders for the politically naive.

[Yurt]

[cawacko]

Originally Posted by Jarod

Tea Pary = Republican marketing plan set up by Republican insiders for the politically naive.

a lot of bit of irony in your last two words there

[Beefy]

The fact that they hired Palin, another big government mouthpiece that is truly one of the worst things to happen to the Conservative movement, is enough for me to say okay, they ARE just another wing of the Republican imperial machine, and they're just another bunch of lemmings. Goddamit. They could have made chicken salad, instead, they made chicken shit.

Where are the real conservatives? The fiscal conservatives? Where the fuck are they?

[Jarod]

Thats just lip service to get elected, noone is a fiscal conservative.

[Jarod]

Funny how Scott Brown and Sarah Palin both claim to be "tea party" when they are about as politically opposit as can be.

[cawacko]

Originally Posted by Jarod

Funny how Scott Brown and Sarah Palin both claim to be "tea party" when they are about as politically opposit as can be.

tea party is not about social issues

[Damocles]

Originally Posted by Jarod

Thats just lip service to get elected, noone is a fiscal conservative.

Then we are doomed. One party just drives us there faster than the other.

[Yurt]

Originally Posted by Jarod

Funny how Scott Brown and Sarah Palin both claim to be "tea party" when they are about as politically opposit as can be.

brown claims to be tea party? link

[Yurt]

Originally Posted by Beefy

The fact that they hired Palin, another big government mouthpiece that is truly one of the worst things to happen to the Conservative movement, is enough for me to say okay, they ARE just another wing of the Republican imperial machine, and they're just another bunch of lemmings. Goddamit. They could have made chicken salad, instead, they made chicken shit.

Where are the real conservatives? The fiscal conservatives? Where the fuck are they?

no one knows, they were seen last in a some glitzy bar getting free drinks

what i don't like is how dems hold their nose in the air from their false moral highground about repubs and corps....unions are as powerful, if not more powerful, than corporations when it comes to influencing politics.

with the recent scotus decision, my question has been...ok, if no corps can buy political ads (to those who oppose the ruling), then no other organization, including the dem or repub party, can buy political ads. of course this seems ideal, however, what if you get a candidate like obama verses mccain? 700 million to 90 million.....then money once again buys elections.

not to mention, it chills speech. it stops groups from forming, to pool their money and voice their opinion.

[Beefy]

Originally Posted by Yurt

no one knows, they were seen last in a some glitzy bar getting free drinks

what i don't like is how dems hold their nose in the air from their false moral highground about repubs and corps....unions are as powerful, if not more powerful, than corporations when it comes to influencing politics.

with the recent scotus decision, my question has been...ok, if no corps can buy political ads (to those who oppose the ruling), then no other organization, including the dem or repub party, can buy political ads. of course this seems ideal, however, what if you get a candidate like obama verses mccain? 700 million to 90 million.....then money once again buys elections.

not to mention, it chills speech. it stops groups from forming, to pool their money and voice their opinion.

Well then, don't become a cog in the wheel. Yeah, Unions have been purchasing votes in the congress as long as big pharm, banking, auto, Chem..... This "Tea Party" movement has gone from grass roots to Elephant roots in a matter of months. They don't impress me. They hired Palin for a lot of money to be their mouthpiece in an effort to galvanized the idiot wing of the Republican party, and that's NOT, what they proported to be about.

Are they fiscal conservatives or not? Palin? Fiscal Conservatism and global intervention cannot be aligned no matter how hard the Republicans try. And I'm surprised that the movement has come this far before opening up their trenchcoat and showing the world what they really are.

Dammit. They had a chance. This is the death knell. Mark my words.

[Threedee]

Tea Party = Something that happened in Boston in 1773.

[Yurt]

Originally Posted by Beefy

Well then, don't become a cog in the wheel. Yeah, Unions have been purchasing votes in the congress as long as big pharm, banking, auto, Chem..... This "Tea Party" movement has gone from grass roots to Elephant roots in a matter of months. They don't impress me. They hired Palin for a lot of money to be their mouthpiece in an effort to galvanized the idiot wing of the Republican party, and that's NOT, what they proported to be about.

Are they fiscal conservatives or not? Palin? Fiscal Conservatism and global intervention cannot be aligned no matter how hard the Republicans try. And I'm surprised that the movement has come this far before opening up their trenchcoat and showing the world what they really are.

Dammit. They had a chance. This is the death knell. Mark my words.

don't worry, i won't become a cog in the wheel.

global intervention

this is not just one idealogy, explain to me what this means.

[Beefy]

Originally Posted by Yurt

don't worry, i won't become a cog in the wheel.



this is not just one idealogy, explain to me what this means.

It is one of the common traits between the two parties and is very much one ideology. Its just a matter of who argues against the flavor of the day. Global interventionism is something that Wilson introduced us to, all the while claiming he was isolationary or non-interventionist. But since WWI the US has veen involved in nearly constant military conflict, wheter through use of weapons or threat of weapons. The US has had dozens of "conflicts" (I prefer to call them Wars out of respect for those Americans that were getting shot at and firing back in foreign countries) since the end of WWII. We have troops today, TODAY in over 130 countries, we sanction countries that don't follow our lead and we impose leaders on countries that have diametrically different cultures than out own, IE Iraq and Afghnistan.

One of the most intrinsic problems we have as a country is that the public is content with their lcd tvs, their big SUVs, and they've turned a blind eye to what our government is doing to the rest of the world. Complacency will be the death of the complacent.

[Thorn]

Originally Posted by Beefy

It is one of the common traits between the two parties and is very much one ideology. Its just a matter of who argues against the flavor of the day. Global interventionism is something that Wilson introduced us to, all the while claiming he was isolationary or non-interventionist. But since WWI the US has veen involved in nearly constant military conflict, wheter through use of weapons or threat of weapons. The US has had dozens of "conflicts" (I prefer to call them Wars out of respect for those Americans that were getting shot at and firing back in foreign countries) since the end of WWII. We have troops today, TODAY in over 130 countries, we sanction countries that don't follow our lead and we impose leaders on countries that have diametrically different cultures than out own, IE Iraq and Afghnistan.

One of the most intrinsic problems we have as a country is that the public is content with their lcd tvs, their big SUVs, and they've turned a blind eye to what our government is doing to the rest of the world. Complacency will be the death of the complacent.

According to something I read a while ago, complacency is one of the final stages of democracy. If we value what we have we'd better shape up.