Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

etc.

View
49 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

49. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 14:21 Prez
 
I admire you passion for sure. And "guilty" on the accusation of my considering you narrow-minded. Bear in mind however that the only evidence I have to go on is what you've written in this one thread (hardly an ample supply of information from which to draw a complete picture).

Still, you are drawing conclusions how about how valid my opinion is without even an inkling of how I arrived at it - just that it's counter to yours and by your own angry words in this thread that makes it attackable. I could present your "better data" when in fact you would consider it just long enough to see how you could poke wholes in its validity, not weigh it on its own merit. Sorry, I don't have the time or the desire for one of those discussions. You may indeed be a very objective and clear-thinking debate partner, but it is in no way evident in this thread and I have long since given going on faith that there may be more to some people than meets they eye. Clearly there often is, but all too often for my tastes what you see is what you get.

This comment was edited on Aug 24, 2012, 20:49.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 13:40 Scottish Martial Arts
 
Just the two points you make, about the level of Obama's fiscal irresponsibility relative to other administrations and the stimulus's (stimuli?) that both he and Bush cooked up can be easily refuted simply by me throwing a different set of equally valid and applicable (not to mention linkable) data - but to what end? Does it change anything?

Yes, it has the power to change everything. You're assuming that because I have an opinion that my opinion cannot be changed. In other words, you're assuming that I'm narrow-minded. If you have a better set of data then I'm all ears. Show it to me: it might change my mind.

Meanwhile, we're in the midst of a Presidential election, and who we choose to be President DOES matter. And that means we need to sift through the facts, analyze the arguments made by the candidates, and make a decision based upon which candidate's policies will best help the country. This is ostensibly a democracy, and that means citizens have the OBLIGATION to make a decision about how to move the country forward.

One final note: We should absolutely show civility and respect in our discourse, but that does not mean we should treat all opinions equally. Some opinions are not supported by the evidence, are poorly reasoned, or are just plain wrong. Showing respect to your rhetorical opponents does not mean politely nodding your head when he or she says something that is demonstrably false, or arguable one way or the other. It means being willing to challenge their ideas in a reasoned and reasonable fashion, without resorting to rhetorical tools designed to inflame passions against your opponent personally.

This comment was edited on Aug 23, 2012, 13:49.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 13:29 Scottish Martial Arts
 
Well then show me the fiscal profligacy of the Obama administration and explain how it is dramatically worse than the fiscal irresponsibility that is inherent to Ryan plan. To simply make mention of an "abhorrent lack of fiscal responsibility" on the part of the Obama administration doesn't leave your readers with much to go on but "pre-conceived notions". I don't think your claim holds up when put under examination. Since you didn't provide an argument, I can only assume two things: your facts are wrong or your reasoning is faulty. I assumed the former, and responded accordingly.

But honestly, it feels like you're trying to have it both ways here. You want to stay aloof, above the fray, and avoid having to actually defend your ideas, while at the same time you want to toss out controversial claims. I'm sorry, but if you're only willing to debate someone who has no biases, no pre-conceived notions, and no leanings one way or the other -- in other words you're only willing to debate someone who doesn't have an opinion -- then you aren't going to find anyone to debate. Plus, it would be a pretty boring discussion on top of that.

Look, I haven't been uncivil here. If I have, I apologize. Perhaps I have assumed too much, but then if you put out claims unsupported by arguments, then all I can do is make assumption about why you believe what you believe. But I'm not going to stand by and listen to claims that I believe don't hold up under scrutiny without challenging them. Likewise, I'm not going to take lightly the implication that I'm somehow to blame for political dysfunction because I have an opinion.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 13:00 Prez
 
... I suspect, however, that much of your assumptions about the fiscal policy of the current administration is based upon misinformation, which my party has been keen to spread the past several years...

Right there I knew all debate is pointless. Pre-conceived (and in this case ill-conceived) notions do not for objective discourse make.

Anyway what's the point? You have your set of numbers, data, and "facts" like the ones people on both sides of the aisle throw out about the stimulus packages you made mention of (which in truth were flat-out neither the economic disaster NOR boom that they are made out to be by the respective sides). I have my set of numbers and data which I interpreted through my own prism of knowledge, experience, rational judgement, and good ole-fashioned guessing to mean something. I think the difference is I freely admit don't have a friggin' clue if anything I believe is right or sound - I only trust that I arrived at my conclusions with calculated deliberation over said info and came to the best conclusion I could. I could easily be wrong. But no one else will ever admit that. Everyone KNOWS EVERYTHING, but no one but dumbasses ever run for political office.

Just the two points you make, about the level of Obama's fiscal irresponsibility relative to other administrations and the stimulus's (stimuli?) that both he and Bush cooked up can be easily refuted simply by me throwing a different set of equally valid and applicable (not to mention linkable) data - but to what end? Does it change anything?

All I need to do is put forth the simple, inarguable point that as things are, our country is an embarrassment in nearly every way. I don't need any links, numbers, data, or whatever else to make that self-evident point. The evidence is all around. I'll leave the Blame-storming to others. It's worse than useless, and counterproductive.

This comment was edited on Aug 23, 2012, 13:15.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 09:59 Scottish Martial Arts
 
Well I'd be happy to listen to your arguments for why the Ryan budget is an improvement over the current situation. I suspect, however, that much of your assumptions about the fiscal policy of the current administration is based upon misinformation, which my party has been keen to spread the past several years.

For example, the CBO has concluded that Obamacare is revenue neutral. Now the CBO isn't always right, and some of their assumptions are a bit optimistic. But the idea that Obamacare is a massively irresponsible new spending program simply doesn't jive with what the number crunchers have come up with. Furthermore, you don't like the provisions of Obamacare? When broken up into it's constituent parts, the majority of the provisions of the law are actually extremely popular in polls. Additionally, the law itself was modeled off the healthcare reform enacted in Massachusetts by... Mitt Romney, who got the idea from the Republican party's healthcare proposal during the 1993 Clinton Healthcare Debate. Obamacare is the Republican healthcare solution -- the only reason the GOP threw the fit it did was because a Democrat got to enact the law, not them.

Likewise, the Stimulus package was a failed experiment in massive Keynesian-style direct government spending, right? Wrong, actually. The single largest component of the stimulus bill was... tax breaks, $288 billion of them. Republicans who call the stimulus a massive failure on the one hand, and then turn around and castigate the administration for not giving tax relief to "job creators" are playing you for a fool. Don't fall for it. Furthermore 3/4 of a trillion dollars is a fuck load of money, but would you really rather that the government had done nothing to stimulate the economy in the face of the worst recession since the Great Depression? Again our bonds have been trading at record low interest rates for years now -- we can afford to borrow the money, as long as we are serious about debt reduction once the economy does recover.

Finally, Obama blew a huge whole in our budget by massively expanding the federal government right? Wrong, again. According to the OMB the number of federal workers relative to the overall population is at its lowest since we started keeping track in the Kennedy administration (source). The real cause of the massive deficits we have run the past several years isn't federal government expansion: it's dramatically reduced tax revenues as a result of reduced economic activity brought on by the recession.

Look don't get me wrong: I never bought into the Obama magic, and he's been a terribly ineffective leader who doesn't deserve reelection. But most of the charges that get leveled against him by the GOP are bullshit. Toss in the Ryan plan, which again will increase our debt by over $2.5 TRILLION dollars (3x the cost of the stimulus) while simultaneously devastating our social safety net, and I have a very hard time envisioning a scenario that I will vote for my party -- I guess the GOP doesn't want moderates anymore.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 09:50 Beamer
 
RollinThundr wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 20:16:

I think that's fair, I just think the OWS folks are going after the wrong people, go after the corrupt politicians who are in bed with wall st to begin with. Republicans and Democrats both.

Whoa.

We agree!


Going after the rich people won't do anything, and they're not technically doing anything wrong, so telling them they're the problem just makes them defensive.
Go after the politicians catering to the few at the expense of the many. Go after the people writing the rules rich people play by.


I am still surprised no one took over OWS and made it something entirely different from how it started, like the Palin types managed with the Tea Party.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 09:15 Prez
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 01:26:
People still argue things along party lines, as if either party weren't only interested in keeping their power and authority?

Neither party is providing the leadership or solutions that we need to get the country on track again, that much is true. But claiming that both parties are equally part of the problem may sound sophisticated and post-partisan, but it doesn't actually jive with the facts of the matter. If the Democrats have no answers, the Republicans have really bad answers. The Ryan budget is proof positive of that -- it will dramatically increase the national debt, and will represent a huge transfer of wealth from the middle class and poor to the wealthiest among us. Now maybe by giving the rich more money they'll create jobs and we'll all benefit, but trickle-down economics simply isn't supported by the evidence. Fun fact: the cuts proposed by the Ryan budget are so draconian that when brought up in political focus groups, the group members refused to believe they were real.And I say all of this as a registered Republican who voted for McCain and Bush in the last two Presidential elections.

See, that's the funny thing about how the political game works. You and I look at the same set of facts (take the Ryan budget for example, which I view as, while drastic and even a tad risky, a MASSIVE improvement over the absolutely abhorrent lack of any real obstensible competence or fiscal responsibility on the part of the current administration) , and not only come up with bipolar opposite conclusions, but then I get accused of pandering to a "post partisan" stance rather than havering arrived at my beliefs in any sort of rational, adult, or logical way. It's utterly amazing to me that intelligent people can actually believe that they are the only ones who can spin meaningless numbers, incomplete data, and, imperfect future projections into THE one set of impirical "facts" that preclude all differences in conclusion by other people.

Isn't it made clear by such a case that the complete lack of respect for varying viewpoints has trickled down from the forever partisan Executive and Legislative branches to the everyday political discourse between common men and women? It's like a cancer; a disease that utterly precludes progress in ANY direction without chance of compromise or agreement at any juncture. If one were to take an honest appraisal of how ingrained such behavior has become inAmerican culture is it really a surprise that we've been sliding backwards for so long without even the slightest improvement?

Wow, things are a mess in this country.

This comment was edited on Aug 23, 2012, 09:22.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: etc. Aug 23, 2012, 01:26 Scottish Martial Arts
 
People still argue things along party lines, as if either party weren't only interested in keeping their power and authority?

Neither party is providing the leadership or solutions that we need to get the country on track again, that much is true. But claiming that both parties are equally part of the problem may sound sophisticated and post-partisan, but it doesn't actually jive with the facts of the matter. If the Democrats have no answers, the Republicans have really bad answers. The Ryan budget is proof positive of that -- it will dramatically increase the national debt, and will represent a huge transfer of wealth from the middle class and poor to the wealthiest among us. Now maybe by giving the rich more money they'll create jobs and we'll all benefit, but trickle-down economics simply isn't supported by the evidence. Fun fact: the cuts proposed by the Ryan budget are so draconian that when brought up in political focus groups, the group members refused to believe they were real.And I say all of this as a registered Republican who voted for McCain and Bush in the last two Presidential elections.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 20:16 RollinThundr
 
Prez wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 18:16:
People still argue things along party lines, as if either party weren't only interested in keeping their power and authority? Wow...

Honestly, for all the bashing of the Tea Party (based largely on media disinformation and not fact based on my experience), it's the grass roots parties like the Tea Parties and even the Occupiers who actually seem genuinely interested in fixing things despite having wildly varying ideals and methodologies.

I think that's fair, I just think the OWS folks are going after the wrong people, go after the corrupt politicians who are in bed with wall st to begin with. Republicans and Democrats both.

I'm still pretty pissed the SC is allowing Obamacare to go through, abusing the commerce clause like that along with fixing an issue so terribly that it will make healthcare more expensive for everyone is such a fucking travesty.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 18:16 Prez
 
People still argue things along party lines, as if either party weren't only interested in keeping their power and authority? Wow...

Honestly, for all the bashing of the Tea Party (based largely on media disinformation and not fact based on my experience), it's the grass roots parties like the Tea Parties and even the Occupiers who actually seem genuinely interested in fixing things despite having wildly varying ideals and methodologies.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 16:12 Beamer
 
m0deth wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 15:21:
I'm sorry, is there any sort of moron-translator I can run this through so that it appears to make any logical sense?
I can see why people in this thread get confused, though. The problem is that his name is a portmanteau of "Bloom," implying flower, and "Berg" implying a large city, so he chose the name "flower city" and only a stupid liberal hippie would do such a thing. On the plus side, "bloom" is an American word that couldn't possibly be traced back to any root language.

BTW: Bacteria blooms....and ice can berg...true story, and more familiar even. Fucking 'flower city'....now that's a good one.

2nd BTW: Curt Shitting will most likely be investigated now, into his handling of corporate funds. We'll all get an intimate look at how a "fiscally responsible adult" runs a $125m business into the ground. My guess is, it will be all too familiar.

It's a mocking reference to the 9th post of this thread:
fascism being the combination of words federal and capitalism- so, essentially federally controlled capitalism.

Apologies if your sarcasm filter isn't properly calibrated - I tried to make it as over he top as possible.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 15:21 m0deth
 
I'm sorry, is there any sort of moron-translator I can run this through so that it appears to make any logical sense?
I can see why people in this thread get confused, though. The problem is that his name is a portmanteau of "Bloom," implying flower, and "Berg" implying a large city, so he chose the name "flower city" and only a stupid liberal hippie would do such a thing. On the plus side, "bloom" is an American word that couldn't possibly be traced back to any root language.

BTW: Bacteria blooms....and ice can berg...true story, and more familiar even. Fucking 'flower city'....now that's a good one.

2nd BTW: Curt Shitting will most likely be investigated now, into his handling of corporate funds. We'll all get an intimate look at how a "fiscally responsible adult" runs a $125m business into the ground. My guess is, it will be all too familiar.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 09:37 Beamer
 
nin wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 08:43:
Democrats do the same thing, except they want to reward people for being lazy and keep people dependent on them telling them how to live their lives. Look at Bloomberg with his bans on this, bans on that.

Look at Bloomberg, who's been a member of three parties, and not been a democrat for 11 years...


And who became mayor as a Republican.

I can see why people in this thread get confused, though. The problem is that his name is a portmanteau of "Bloom," implying flower, and "Berg" implying a large city, so he chose the name "flower city" and only a stupid liberal hippie would do such a thing. On the plus side, "bloom" is an American word that couldn't possibly be traced back to any root language.

This comment was edited on Aug 22, 2012, 09:43.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 08:43 nin
 
Democrats do the same thing, except they want to reward people for being lazy and keep people dependent on them telling them how to live their lives. Look at Bloomberg with his bans on this, bans on that.

Look at Bloomberg, who's been a member of three parties, and not been a democrat for 11 years...

 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 00:56 RollinThundr
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 00:35:
I don't think wanting some form of becoming fiscally responsible is a crazy idea personally.

Except in Republican parlance, "fiscal responsibility" is code for "fiscal irresponsibility that benefits our constituents, not the Democrats'". If the Tea Party and the Republicans were serious about deficit reduction, then tax increases and defense cuts would be on the table. Those things aren't on the table, so the Right clearly isn't serious. I mean look at the Ryan plan: it not only keeps the fiscally irresponsible Bush tax cuts, but calls for new tax cuts that would cost $4.3 trillion dollars. Meanwhile, Ryan proposes about $1.7 trillion in domestic spending cuts (Defense is predictably off the table). I don't know about you but digging a $2.6 trillion hole doesn't strike me as a plan for deficit reduction. Don't get me wrong, entitlement reform needs to happen if we're to get our fiscal house in order, but then so do tax hikes and a more realistic defense budget.

Again, I don't think there is anything wrong with supporting a balanced budget. But to claim that you're a fiscal hawk on the one hand, and then to support politicians and policies that would only worsen our fiscal outlook strikes me as hypocritical. And this is leaving aside entirely the issue of whether or not it's wise to strive for balanced budgets in a severely depressed economy (a balanced budget means higher taxes and lower spending, both of which combine to weaken economic growth).

Democrats do the same thing, except they want to reward people for being lazy and keep people dependent on them telling them how to live their lives. Look at Bloomberg with his bans on this, bans on that.

They love to throw billions on failed alternative energy companies that gain us nothing. Obama said himself he doesn't care about high gas prices because it makes "alternatives" more appealing to the moron masses who don't pay attention to anything unless the majority liberal media tells them to.

Or his little Life of Julia, where the government holds your hand from cradle to grave. Would love to know how he expects us to pay for it. oh right on the back of the people that would never qualify for said handouts because they make too much.

Let's face it, people are so fucking lazy these days and personal and fiscal responsibility is taboo.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 00:48 RollinThundr
 
Matshock wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 00:29:
There's the problem though Beamer- I haven't called for the .gov to push a Biblical agenda even once. You just think I have because you are hysterical with fear- because you know the liberal way of life can't be free of dire negative consequences without heavy-handed government protection and funding.

That's going to happen soon- you're out of other peoples' money. I just want us to recognize that and prepare accordingly rather than wake up one day to find the WIC and SNAP card accounts empty and a panic to set in- or alternatively the cards still work but you can't buy much with them because a loaf of bread costs $20.00.

The best we can hope to do now is take the chains off of domestic energy, industry and farming. That way at least we can move and eat and work.

It will be a mercy if we can even maintain Social Security and Medicare for current seniors.

Romney/Ryan's rhetoric looks pretty rosy to me. I think they're in for a rough ride even if they do win.

Theocracy is about as far away from reality for the USA as a state-funded liberal paradise.

Anyhow, this is going way too macro. This is my last political post on BN's. Folks have pretty much made up their minds at this point anyway if they even have minds to make.

Keep the peace and I will too- take care.


Big meanie, dashing those poor liberal dreams of nanny state utopia! How dare you!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 00:46 Sepharo
 
Matshock wrote on Aug 22, 2012, 00:29:
There's the problem though Beamer- I haven't called for the .gov to push a Biblical agenda even once. You just think I have because you are hysterical with fear- because you know the liberal way of life can't be free of dire negative consequences without heavy-handed government protection and funding.

That's going to happen soon- you're out of other peoples' money. I just want us to recognize that and prepare accordingly rather than wake up one day to find the WIC and SNAP card accounts empty and a panic to set in- or alternatively the cards still work but you can't buy much with them because a loaf of bread costs $20.00.

The best we can hope to do now is take the chains off of domestic energy, industry and farming. That way at least we can move and eat and work.

It will be a mercy if we can even maintain Social Security and Medicare for current seniors.
__________________________________________________

Romney/Ryan's rhetoric looks pretty rosy to me. I think they're in for a rough ride even if they do win.

Theocracy is about as far away from reality for the USA as a state-funded liberal paradise.

Anyhow, this is going way too macro. This is my last political post on BN's. Folks have pretty much made up their minds at this point anyway if they even have minds to make.

Keep the peace and I will too- take care.

Disagree with everything above and agree with everything below the line.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 00:35 Scottish Martial Arts
 
I don't think wanting some form of becoming fiscally responsible is a crazy idea personally.

Except in Republican parlance, "fiscal responsibility" is code for "fiscal irresponsibility that benefits our constituents, not the Democrats'". If the Tea Party and the Republicans were serious about deficit reduction, then tax increases and defense cuts would be on the table. Those things aren't on the table, so the Right clearly isn't serious. I mean look at the Ryan plan: it not only keeps the fiscally irresponsible Bush tax cuts, but calls for new tax cuts that would cost $4.3 trillion dollars. Meanwhile, Ryan proposes about $1.7 trillion in domestic spending cuts (Defense is predictably off the table). I don't know about you but digging a $2.6 trillion hole doesn't strike me as a plan for deficit reduction. Don't get me wrong, entitlement reform needs to happen if we're to get our fiscal house in order, but then so do tax hikes and a more realistic defense budget.

Again, I don't think there is anything wrong with supporting a balanced budget. But to claim that you're a fiscal hawk on the one hand, and then to support politicians and policies that would only worsen our fiscal outlook strikes me as hypocritical. And this is leaving aside entirely the issue of whether or not it's wise to strive for balanced budgets in a severely depressed economy (a balanced budget means higher taxes and lower spending, both of which combine to weaken economic growth).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: etc. Aug 22, 2012, 00:29 Matshock
 
There's the problem though Beamer- I haven't called for the .gov to push a Biblical agenda even once. You just think I have because you are hysterical with fear- because you know the liberal way of life can't be free of dire negative consequences without heavy-handed government protection and funding.

That's going to happen soon- you're out of other peoples' money. I just want us to recognize that and prepare accordingly rather than wake up one day to find the WIC and SNAP card accounts empty and a panic to set in- or alternatively the cards still work but you can't buy much with them because a loaf of bread costs $20.00.

The best we can hope to do now is take the chains off of domestic energy, industry and farming. That way at least we can move and eat and work.

It will be a mercy if we can even maintain Social Security and Medicare for current seniors.

Romney/Ryan's rhetoric looks pretty rosy to me. I think they're in for a rough ride even if they do win.

Theocracy is about as far away from reality for the USA as a state-funded liberal paradise.

Anyhow, this is going way too macro. This is my last political post on BN's. Folks have pretty much made up their minds at this point anyway if they even have minds to make.

Keep the peace and I will too- take care.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: etc. Aug 21, 2012, 23:51 Beamer
 
RollinThundr wrote on Aug 21, 2012, 23:40:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Aug 21, 2012, 23:33:
RollinThundr wrote on Aug 21, 2012, 22:52:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Aug 21, 2012, 15:54:
You've got to be a troll.

Even worse, I think he might be a tea-partier.

Seriously? You had to go there?

Meh, maybe I'm just only encountering the crazy ones, but Matshock's ridiculous behavior and arguments seems pretty par for the course with the Tea Party faithful.


Every party has fringe nutbags, I don't think wanting some form of becoming fiscally responsible is a crazy idea personally. But to each their own.

But, arguably, the Tea Party is the fringe nutbags of the Republican Party. "We want less government involvement in our rights, unless those rights conflict with the Bible!"

It's not what it began as, as it was co-opted by, well, the fringe nutbags.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo