Both his father and his grandfather were four star admirals in the Navy. If his lineal descent isn't ok then no ones is.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
I have yet to see proof of this. Where is his long form birth certificate?Jay wrote:
On US soil...
Kmar wrote:
Both his father and his grandfather were four star admirals in the Navy. If his lineal descent isn't ok then no ones is.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
I have yet to see proof of this. Where is his long form birth certificate?Jay wrote:
On US soil...
Last edited by Jay (2011-06-01 18:57:25)
And how exactly do you come to that conclusion?Vilham wrote:
lol where does that guy say failures? I read problems, which would be the ones such as people asking for his birth certificate, which blatently is because hes black.
What I think is ironic is that now reducing the deficit is somehow a "right wing" issue.... there were plenty of "liberals" complaining about the deficit, government spending, etc. when Bush was president. Not covered heavily by the media, but Obama himself apparently was against raising the debt ceiling when he was a senator.Kmar wrote:
I don't think everyone thinks tea partiers are racist. I don't even think most people do. A little nutty perhaps, lol. Maybe if there weren't so many of them donning three cornered hats and costumes they'd be taken more seriously.
This makes negative sense.Vilham wrote:
lol where does that guy say failures? I read problems, which would be the ones such as people asking for his birth certificate, which blatently is because hes black.
They must be closet racist then. People will identify with a group that best projects their message. As far as I know the biggest beef the Tea Party has is the economic issues. IIRC the Tea Party movement began soon after Rick Santelli made this reference.Blue Herring wrote:
Of course the "tea party" has racists in it. It's an opposition to a president who happens to be black. How could that NOT attract racists?
The tea party is nothing more than a bunch of angry libertarians who(like everything Ron Paul does) became a political tool for the Republican party.
As per racism in the NAACP, it happens all the time. Less in the form of a sign and more in the form of political terrorism and ideological sabotage.
I think the confusion here is that the "tea party" opposition paints it as a racist movement because of a select few people(even though the ideology itself isn't racist) and people defending it(pretty much only Lowing) are addressing that viewpoint.
Personally I find the people they support to be very shallow and transparent. This despite agreeing with their goals. There simply isn't a stand out candidate, and I literally shutter to imagine someone like Palin in the whitehouse. Luckily I think she is unelectable.Spearhead wrote:
What I think is ironic is that now reducing the deficit is somehow a "right wing" issue.... there were plenty of "liberals" complaining about the deficit, government spending, etc. when Bush was president. Not covered heavily by the media, but Obama himself apparently was against raising the debt ceiling when he was a senator.Kmar wrote:
I don't think everyone thinks tea partiers are racist. I don't even think most people do. A little nutty perhaps, lol. Maybe if there weren't so many of them donning three cornered hats and costumes they'd be taken more seriously.
What I think is hurting the Tea party the most is their alignment with the social conservatives... if they were honestly for "less" government, like the libertarians, I'd probably join them myself. But a lot of Tea party aligned politicians seem to be social conservatives. That, to me anyway, is the one reason I don't trust them.
Sarah Palin wrote:
“It’s not about me,” she added. “It’s not a publicity-seeking tour. It’s about highlighting the great things about America.”
The "tea party"'s message is racism? I thought it was a Republicanistic ideal of early America(never existed)Kmar wrote:
They must be closet racist then. People will identify with a group that best projects their message.
The "tea party" has whatever beef suits the neoconservative movement.As far as I know the biggest beef the Tea Party has is the economic issues.
Unless he was talking about Bush stimulus, I doubt it.IIRC the Tea Party movement began soon after Rick Santelli made this reference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp-Jw-5Kx8k
The "tea party" become a re branding attempt by the GOP. Worked pretty well, it's sad that the Libertarian base is so easily duped. I'd much rather have Libertarian v Democrat than Democrat v the bumbling hypocritical retards that are the republican party.Really though, the Tea Party is not very relevant. They actually make up a very tiny fraction of American voters. Any one of the established political factions would crush them in a bid for the POTUS. They're entertaining, so they garner a lot of attention.
No that is not what I said. If they are closet racist then obviously the public message must be something else.Blue Herring wrote:
The "tea party"'s message is racism? I thought it was a Republicanistic ideal of early America(never existed)Kmar wrote:
They must be closet racist then. People will identify with a group that best projects their message.
Every political cult serves their own agenda.Blue Herring wrote:
The "tea party" has whatever beef suits the neoconservative movement.As far as I know the biggest beef the Tea Party has is the economic issues.
It wasn't until Santelli's comments were made that they gained the national spotlight. "Fox News commentator Juan Williams says that the TPM emerged largely as a result of Paul's 2008 primary campaign, although on-air comments delivered on CNBC by Rick Santelli are credited with inspiring a number of Tea Party-themed websites and events".. That's when the movement gained popularity and attention. The first protest were organized after Santelli stoked the fire.Blue Herring wrote:
Unless he was talking about Bush stimulus, I doubt it.IIRC the Tea Party movement began soon after Rick Santelli made this reference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp-Jw-5Kx8k
On February 19, 2009, in a broadcast from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, CNBC Business News editor Rick Santelli criticized the government plan to refinance mortgages, which had just been announced the day before. He said that those plans were "promoting bad behavior" by "subsidizing losers' mortgages". He suggested holding a tea party for traders to gather and dump the derivatives in the Chicago River on July 1.A number of the floor traders around him cheered on his proposal, to the amusement of the hosts in the studio. Santelli's "rant" became a viral video after being featured on the Drudge Report.
In response to Santelli, websites such as ChicagoTeaParty.com (registered in August 2008 by Chicago radio producer Zack Christenson) were live within 12 hours. About 10 hours after Santelli's remarks, reTeaParty.com was bought to coordinate Tea Parties scheduled for Independence Day and, as of March 4, was reported to be receiving 11,000 visitors a day
Political parties are always trying to bring a fresh image to the public after a loss. The GOP used to be the party of rights and the Democrats used to be the party of strong national defense. "bumbling hypocritical retards" goes both ways.Blue Herring wrote:
The "tea party" become a re branding attempt by the GOP. Worked pretty well, it's sad that the Libertarian base is so easily duped. I'd much rather have Libertarian v Democrat than Democrat v the bumbling hypocritical retards that are the republican party.Really though, the Tea Party is not very relevant. They actually make up a very tiny fraction of American voters. Any one of the established political factions would crush them in a bid for the POTUS. They're entertaining, so they garner a lot of attention.
Ron Paul...Kmar wrote:
There simply isn't a stand out candidate,
Well yea, he stands out when he is talking about heroin. ..lolSpearhead wrote:
Ron Paul...Kmar wrote:
There simply isn't a stand out candidate,
As a "liberal" I dont agree with him on everything to be sure. Some of his ideas may be considered unorthodox or "wacko"... but he stands out as a man of class and principle, and he continues to run for president even though he knows he's going to lose.Kmar wrote:
Well yea, he stands out when he is talking about heroin. ..lolSpearhead wrote:
Ron Paul...Kmar wrote:
There simply isn't a stand out candidate,
Except there weren't any legitimate questions, he was born in Hawai and has a US birth certificate. So no. The only questions were from people that saw someone who was black and whos dad was from Africa and jumped on it.lowing wrote:
no it is blatantly because there was questions as to whether or not he was born in the states. Fueled more so by the ambiguous responses when inquired about it.Vilham wrote:
lol where does that guy say failures? I read problems, which would be the ones such as people asking for his birth certificate, which blatently is because hes black.
Jesse Jackson ran 25 or so years ago and his nationality was never an issue, so get over yourself with this bullshit that they did it because he is black.
Herman Caine is going to run in '12 and I will bet his nationality will not be in question either. A man I will vote for by the way.
Last edited by Vilham (2011-06-02 01:54:43)
That was it? He was black was their reason? Why didn't they do something like that to Jesse Jackson then, or now Herman Caine? I m mean if is as cut and dry as, he is black.Vilham wrote:
Except there weren't any legitimate questions, he was born in Hawai and has a US birth certificate. So no. The only questions were from people that saw someone who was black and whos dad was from Africa and jumped on it.lowing wrote:
no it is blatantly because there was questions as to whether or not he was born in the states. Fueled more so by the ambiguous responses when inquired about it.Vilham wrote:
lol where does that guy say failures? I read problems, which would be the ones such as people asking for his birth certificate, which blatently is because hes black.
Jesse Jackson ran 25 or so years ago and his nationality was never an issue, so get over yourself with this bullshit that they did it because he is black.
Herman Caine is going to run in '12 and I will bet his nationality will not be in question either. A man I will vote for by the way.
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-02 02:01:40)
yes yes, anything other than like or unlike political ideologies must be the reason.Kmar wrote:
Tokenism could be argued. But then again I don't think there is some great underlying racism agenda.
Of course I do, I am not a liberal, I would rather talk with someone that disagrees with me, than talk with someone that agrees with me and sit around and discuss how right we are, and how stupid and racist everyone else is.Kmar wrote:
I think you want someone who really disagrees with you.
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-02 02:33:51)
Of course, only liberals do that.lowing wrote:
than talk with someone that agrees with me and sit around and discuss how right we are, and how stupid and racist everyone else is.
Tea partiers =/= neocons. Two very different ideologies. In fact, 180 out from each other on govt spending, which is the central issue for the TP.Blue Herring wrote:
The "tea party" has whatever beef suits the neoconservative movement.
Yes we've went over this.. you're here to troll because that's the only reason to be here.lowing wrote:
Of course I do, I am not a liberal, I would rather talk with someone that disagrees with me, than talk with someone that agrees with me and sit around and discuss how right we are, and how stupid and racist everyone else is.Kmar wrote:
I think you want someone who really disagrees with you.
I gotta take your word for it, read EE every now and again......no thanks.Kmar wrote:
Yes we've went over this.. you're here to troll because that's the only reason to be here.lowing wrote:
Of course I do, I am not a liberal, I would rather talk with someone that disagrees with me, than talk with someone that agrees with me and sit around and discuss how right we are, and how stupid and racist everyone else is.Kmar wrote:
I think you want someone who really disagrees with you.
You know, you can have an interesting conversation with someone without being diametrically opposed to every opinion they share.
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-02 15:09:49)
