Bill Maher on Teabaggers... Priceless

It's been awhile since I bothered to read this site, which is sad, because I like about 95% of the people here. Watching Bill Maher on HBO on Friday night, I found this to be refreshing:

Quote:

---

Now here’s an amazing statistic. In a recent poll almost ninety percent of Tea Baggers said that they thought taxes had either gone up or stayed the same under Obama. Only two percent thought they went down. But the reality is taxes have gone down for ninety five percent of working families taxes went down.

Think about that. Only two percent of the people in a “movement� about taxes named after a tax revolt have the slightest idea what’s going on…with taxes.

---

President Obama saved millions of jobs and ended the war too! :rolleyes:

Bill Maher might be a good comedian but is not such a good economist. President Obama has quadrupled Bush's worst deficit in his first year in office. Maybe Bill Maher thinks we are stupid enough to not consider that the debt is deferred taxes, much like buying things on credit, and will only consider the down payment as tax.

Many of the items I purchase have also gone up in price in the last year and the sales taxes go up with them not to mention the unofficial inflation tax eating away at the value of our dollars. I realize that the government says there is no inflation but maybe chauffered Wasnington DC politicians don't get out to the grocery store much.

Maybe Maher thinks that tea party activists are so stupid that they won't notice.

To stimulate the economy, withholding has been cut back. the workers will find out what that means when income taxes come due.

If they eliminated withholding and every single taxpayer had to compute and make quarterly estimated payments for income taxes, the income tax would not survive the next election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

To stimulate the economy, withholding has been cut back. the workers will find out what that means when income taxes come due.

---

Uh, yeah. And if you've looked at the 1040 form for 2009, you'll notice that you get up to a $400 credit if that money hasn't been withheld already = tax cut.

How do you poll a group that isn't a group? Do you call them on their non-listed phones? Gather the various divergent peoples in a corral and make them talk?

Part of the weirdness of the so-called tea party people is they have no center, no leader, no structure ... this was especially apparent during their first non-convention convention. The media in general terms, has had difficulty pigeon-holing this movement because it seeming has sprung from the air. It is amorphous.

So how do you capture a cloud? If Bill Maher's polling organization was able to wrangle a bunch of them in one setting, is by definition a flawed poll. To be valid a poll has to be random, diverse and unstructured. Getting 10 or 100 people in a room and then drawing conclusions makes Mr. Bill's conclusions dubious....because no one knows how many US citizens self-describe themselves as Tea Partiers... 10 thousand? A Hundred thousand, 6 Million?

That said, I wish the TP people would slink back to their respective trailers as I see them nothing more than another version of BAMN or ACORN ... folks who just like to feel important by screaming; and a far as Bill maher goes,... isn't he the male version of Madana's attention-whore complex? He was funny and insightful for a hot minute in 1999. Since then he has been a shanker on the lip of political discourse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Uh, yeah. And if you've looked at the 1040 form for 2009, you'll notice that you get up to a $400 credit if that money hasn't been withheld already = tax cut.

---

That applies only if you have earned income in 2009 or received a government pension. If you're otherwise retired, with no earned income, you get zip. If you're too young for social security, you didn't get the one time $250 payment either.

Quote:

---

Part of the weirdness of the so-called tea party people is they have no center, no leader, no structure

---

The Tea Party has a few leaders, one of them is Dick Armey, who previously was involved in efforts to privatize social security, and is now helping to lead the fight against government health care while at the same time refusing to give up his government health care.

Others are Eric Odom, Allen Fuller and Judson Philips, the man behind the 549.00 cover charge to the "Tea Party Convention"

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/02/...ty-profiteers/

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...as_cup_of_tea/

BF, I love the Armey crack-sniffing logic. wtf is that guy on?

What you are pointing to are still more pot-stirrers, not leaders. from the my seat, far outside their kookville community, I see no leaders at all. I see a few pot-stirrers, a few who are trying to wrestle to beast into a cohesive movement, but thus far I don't see anything that would be considered an organization. Just factions from fractions.

regardless, how do you conduct a poll of nothing and expect your findings to be taken seriously? Any numbers could have been devised and it sounds like that is what Mr. Maher did by quoting a unreliable poll for the shear sake of painting himself an intellectual jokester.

Maher's act is tired. Predictable. Flaccid.

I could never stomach Maher, even when I agreed with what he was saying. His snide, uncouth manner is very unappealing. He just seems like a very condescending miserable little man.

That isn't true. My taxes were less, my refund was more and I also received a tax credit related to a new car that I purchased in December.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

To stimulate the economy, withholding has been cut back. the workers will find out what that means when income taxes come due.

If they eliminated withholding and every single taxpayer had to compute and make quarterly estimated payments for income taxes, the income tax would not survive the next election.

---

I just knew this would bring in the mindless "did not" crap from the right-wing minions and semi-literatti on here. hell, even conservative economists have admitted that we would be in much worse shape now than if Obama's stimulus plan hadn't been enacted [[while at the same time saying it would have been better to offer even more tax cuts to the wealthy, a practice that can not be shown to have ever created much in the way of jobs)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

I just knew this would bring in the mindless "did not" crap from the right-wing minions and semi-literatti on here. hell, even conservative economists have admitted that we would be in much worse shape now than if Obama's stimulus plan hadn't been enacted [[while at the same time saying it would have been better to offer even more tax cuts to the wealthy, a practice that can not be shown to have ever created much in the way of jobs)

---

Most 'conservatives' also go along with Keynesian economists and vote for the same bankers' bailouts. The real argument is between the Keynesian and Austrian economists. The Austiran economists would never have allowed a Fed to create bubbles which burst and/or would have let the crooked Wall Street banks declare bankruptcy instead of rewarding them. Rolling Stone just published a good article about the Keynesian solutions that the Bush and Obama administrations have administered.
Goldman Sachs and other big banks aren't just pocketing the trillions we gave them to rescue the economy - they're re-creating the conditions for another crash

As for Obama's stimulus plan, it is a total disaster. It was supposed to deliver 3.5M new jobs and prevent unemployment from exceeding 8.5%. Instead, the administration is trying to put a happy face :) on 10% unemployment and an additional 3M lost jobs. It was good though for Korean car manufacturers, overspending municipal governments [["2M saved jobs"), and Chinese wind generation manufacturers.

C'mon oladub, don't you know how bad it would have been without the massive debt accumulation necessary to fund the porkulus?

How much do you want to bet that come election time Obama tries to court the Tea Party folks? He will claim that his stances are solid toward gun rights, protecting freedom, and blah blah blah. "I am the candidate devoted more to thier causes than XYZ" - B.O. 2012
Don't rag on the Tea Party folks too much, guys. They are Americans, too. And they vote.




Re~ Health Care:
It's NOT HEALTH CARE! Hasn't the public realized by now that the plan madates people buy Insurance policies or be faced with fines and potentially prison if they refuse to purchase plans? It's not "Health Care" per say, it's more like FORCED HEALTH INSURANCE.

Re~ Privatizing Social Security:
There will be no Social Security after the baby boomers. If there is a way we can get our money back now while it's potentially available, we should all be leaping at the opportunity! Otherwise, it's money we've given to Uncle Sam that we will never see again in our lifetimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papasito

Re~ Health Care:
It's NOT HEALTH CARE! Hasn't the public realized by now that the plan madates people buy Insurance policies or be faced with fines and potentially prison if they refuse to purchase plans? It's not "Health Care" per say, it's more like FORCED HEALTH INSURANCE.

---

Are you familiar with the concept of "pooled risk"? Right now, private-sector insurers in California are raising their premiums 39% on average, because "healthy" folks not insured by their employers have ceased purchasing coverage. Thus, the same [[or increased) costs are passed on to fewer and fewer people. It's a death spiral that no Republican has proposed how to solve.

There are areas of the nation, like Florida and other coastal areas, where property insurance providers have stopped writing policies. This often leaves people to purchase from an "insurer of last resort", which is usually a quasi-public plan, sometimes underwritten by a collective of insurance carriers. Why couldn't health care adopt a similar approach? Oh, that's right, because taking care of the poor and sick amounts to "socialism", and Lord knows we can't have any of that shit getting in the way of our money grubbing! By golly, I need that money so's I can buy a new gun rack and stripper silhouette mudflaps for my truck!

It's obvious our health insurance "system" is a disaster. Why we think keeping the status quo is going to fix things is simply a suspension of belief in logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papasito

Re~ Privatizing Social Security:
There will be no Social Security after the baby boomers. If there is a way we can get our money back now while it's potentially available, we should all be leaping at the opportunity! Otherwise, it's money we've given to Uncle Sam that we will never see again in our lifetimes.

---

Yeah, that's a stellar fix. Let's just all panic and completely undermine the system that we pretend to care so much about. That'll show those old people for depending on socialism!

boy, you guys are like monkeys who get distracted by shinny objects. Wasn't this thread about Bill Maher?

Bill Maher might be an asshole, but at least he discusses things that others do not.

you're right, no one discusses Taxes or the Tea Party movement. Spot on.

The video.

In post #2, just off the top of my head, I came up with three examples of how taxes have been increased or deferred under President Obama. Bill Maher made himself, not the tea party activists, sound like a fool. I liked that he was as snotty and demeaning as he could be toward these people because they know that things they buy are getting more expensive and their deferred tax tab is growing exponentially. They know about his proposed middle class cap and traden tax. Bill's snottiness will only fire them up for the next election. Then Bill's so cool crowd laughed at the concerns of working people. Nice touch.

I was thinking that in some parts of the country, so-called Reagan Democrats are probably attracted to the tea parties. These are swing voters. Bill is saying that Democrats won't miss them and don't want their association anyway.

Reagan Democrat is an American political term used by political analysts to denote traditionally Democratic voters, especially white working-class Northerners, who defected from their party to support RepublicanPresidentRonald Reagan in both the 1980 and 1984 elections. It is also used to refer to the smaller but still substantial number of Democrats who voted for George H. W. Bush in the 1988 election. The term can also be used to describe moderate Democrats who are more conservative than liberal on certain issues like national security and immigration.
The work of Democratic pollsterStan Greenberg is a classic study of Reagan Democrats. Greenberg analyzed white ethnic voters [[largely unionized auto workers) in Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for John F. Kennedy in 1960, but 66 percent for Reagan in 1980. He concluded that "Reagan Democrats" no longer saw Democrats as champions of their working class aspirations, but instead saw them as working primarily for the benefit of others: the very poor, the unemployed, African Americans, and other groups. In addition, Reagan Democrats enjoyed gains during the period of economic prosperity that coincided with the Reagan administration following the "malaise" of the Carter administration. They also supported Reagan's strong stance on national security and opposed the 1980s Democratic Party on such issues as pornography, crime, and taxes. -wikipedia

Stop being a smartass. I wasn't talking about Taxes or the Tea Party movement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gnome

you're right, no one discusses Taxes or the Tea Party movement. Spot on.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ejames01

Stop being a smartass. I wasn't talking about Taxes or the Tea Party movement.

---

jeeze pal, you set yourself up for being made fun of and you want to blame me? Look in the mirror for someone to scream at.

On the subject of Bill Maher discussing subjects not covered in the mainstream press; I'm not aware of any. I am most familar with his mild tuorette's thing going on where he can't self-edit. In the olden days he'd be called a bubblegum machine head ... an idea just drops down from his brain to his tongue and it just rolls out.

Bill Maher is a worthless bore. Not too different from Bill O'Reiley. Wonder if it's an Irish thing, or a loopha thing, or a Bill thing.

Here is where Billy boy got his info apparently:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02...y6201911.shtml

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

I liked that he was as snotty and demeaning as he could be toward these people because they know that things they buy are getting more expensive and their deferred tax tab is growing exponentially.

---

You'll be hearing from my intellectual property attorney, for stealing my thoughts from 2001.

2001- $300 tax "rebate" checks in effort to eliminate budget surplus: HOORAY!

2009- cut taxes in effort to pump liquidity into economy: DEFICITS BAD!

Neither made any sense except to buy votes. The latter was not a tax cut. it was a tax deferral. These politicians must thing we are idiots wanting trinkets. It wasn't their money to give. Borrowing money from China to pretend to give us tax breaks and put our kids in further debt to the Chinese falls short of prudent governance. A better idea would be to reduce federal spending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Neither made any sense except to buy votes. The latter was not a tax cut. it was a tax deferral. These politicians must thing we are idiots wanting trinkets. It wasn't their money to give. Borrowing money from China to pretend to give us tax breaks and put our kids in further debt to the Chinese falls short of prudent governance. A better idea would be to reduce federal spending.

---

This is not true. There is no substantive difference between Bush's "advance refund checks" and the Obama tax cut. Both amounts have to be deducted from the credits on Form 1040.

I suppose, however, that you'd rather have an economy that has zero liquidity, huh? That way, no one gets paid, we all lose our jobs, and the wealthy continue to live high off the hog. You act as if the stimulus bill was passed "just because".

Since the federal funds rate was already essentially zero, what macroeconomic tools and monetary policies were available that would increase liquidity? What would you have proposed?

The Bush tax cuts, on the other hand, WERE an attempt to buy votes. We had a tremendous opportunity to pay down national debt [[you know, that thing that conservatives are suddenly SO concerned about). At the end of the Clinton administration, it was projected we would have a net $1 trillion budget surplus over ten years. Where did all that money go??? Oh, that's right--tax cuts for rich people to buy investment homes with risky mortgages that banks could sell as packaged derivatives....

You're smarter than this. Stop being so penny-wise and pound-foolish.

gp, I was trying to agree that the Bush and Obama tax deferals stunts were equally absurd. The Mother Jones Matt Tiabi link I posted went a long way to explain how our federal government under Bush and Obama has orchestrated the largest heist in human history by transferring private debt to taxpayers. The bandaids that you want Obama to apply to our economic cancer will not do the job of correcting the economy. Obama's Porkulus was a ridiculous joke. "The bill was launched last year amid grandiose promises of "shovel ready" make-work projects. In reality, as the CBO explains, "five programs accounted for more than 80% of the outlays from ARRA in 2009: Medicaid, unemployment compensation, Social Security ... grants to state and local governments ... and student aid." In other words, what was labeled a "stimulus" bill was actually a stimulus to government transfer payments — cash and benefits that are primarily rewards for not working"

What would I have proposed? I would propose that the US stop paying to maintain an empire and that everything the federal government does that is not authorized under the 10th Amendment be ended as soon as reasonably possible. Close the Fed too. Round up employers of illegal aliens and give them hard time. Increase tariffs while reducing income taxes. Restore commodity based money to prevent goverment from inflating away our money's value. Restore government to it's sole duty of protecting our liberty. The government could start treating us like adults. That would reduce some of its unnecessary functions. There would be some increases in State taxes as states took over some federal functions that thes deemed necessary or desirable. I would look for[[ I'm guessing here) a 50% reduction in the federal budget and a 30% increase in state budgets. I'm more interested in reducing spending than debt because spending precedes debt.

Our government is past the point of being penny wise. It is broke. Its all over. The question is just how hard we will fall and at what reduced standard of living we will have to settle for.

I have never seen the food and drug industries ever seriously covered on network news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gnome

jeeze pal, you set yourself up for being made fun of and you want to blame me? Look in the mirror for someone to scream at.

On the subject of Bill Maher discussing subjects not covered in the mainstream press; I'm not aware of any. I am most familar with his mild tuorette's thing going on where he can't self-edit. In the olden days he'd be called a bubblegum machine head ... an idea just drops down from his brain to his tongue and it just rolls out.

Bill Maher is a worthless bore. Not too different from Bill O'Reiley. Wonder if it's an Irish thing, or a loopha thing, or a Bill thing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

What would I have proposed? I would propose that the US stop paying to maintain an empire and that everything the federal government does that is not authorized under the 10th Amendment be ended as soon as reasonably possible.

---

As much as I've heard this straw man argument, not one concerned citizen cares enough to bring suit against the federal government in the Supreme Court. Knock yourself out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Close the Fed too.

---

Sure! We don't need no dang stinking monetary policy. Everyone prints his own money in his garage. Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Round up employers of illegal aliens and give them hard time.

---

Um, what exactly does this accomplish fiscally? You are aware that there is a bureau [[ICE) already dedicated to this cause. Oh, I get it. It's the whole "They took our jobs" thing. Yeah. Because I'm sure you're crushed you couldn't get that $8/hr job at the meatpacking plant, or the gig as a migrant farm laborer. Maybe when employers stop exploiting their labor force [[you know, like when we had organized labor), then legal residents of the United States might take those jobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Increase t

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

ariffs while reducing income taxes.

---

Trade imbalance? What trade imbalance? Let's not trade ANYTHING! We don't need no dang stinking exports! WOOOOOOOO!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Restore commodity based money to prevent goverment from inflating away our money's value.

---

You already did away with our central bank and all monetary policy. You want to see inflation? Just try to reintroduce the gold standard. You'll be penniless overnight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Restore government to it's sole duty of protecting our liberty. The government could start treating us like adults. That would reduce some of its unnecessary functions.

---

I'm sorry that someone done stole your liberty. You have my sympathies.

Our federal government also has the duty to provide for the General Welfare. But hey, if the 19th Century works for you, you can always move to Mississippi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

There would be some increases in State taxes as states took over some federal functions that thes deemed necessary or desirable.

---

This has been happening since the 2001 Bush tax cuts. Welcome to the program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

I would look for[[ I'm guessing here) a 50% reduction in the federal budget and a 30% increase in state budgets. I'm more interested in reducing spending than debt because spending precedes debt.

---

Yup. You're guessing alright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Our government is past the point of being penny wise. It is broke. Its all over. The question is just how hard we will fall and at what reduced standard of living we will have to settle for.

---

You go ahead and settle and feel bad for yourself and blame your woes on the Big Bad Gubment. I'm gonna keep working hard to make progress [[you know, the root of that evil concept known as "progressivism") in the prosperity of myself and my community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

The Austiran economists would never have allowed a Fed to create bubbles

---

the fed didn't create the bubble. bubbles, as anyone who has ever examined history will tell you, are created by desire of people to make a quick buck. hence, the "flipping" phenomenon which drove up real estate at an unprecedented pace. then you toss in all the derivitives the speculators created, and the bubble drove them up as well. the fed had nothing to do with it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

As for Obama's stimulus plan, it is a total disaster. It was supposed to deliver 3.5M new jobs and prevent unemployment from exceeding 8.5%. Instead, the administration is trying to put a happy face :) on 10% unemployment and an additional 3M lost jobs. It was good though for Korean car manufacturers, overspending municipal governments [["2M saved jobs"), and Chinese wind generation manufacturers.

---

and most people without axes or ideologies to grind agree that had the stimulus plan NOT been implemented, we would be at least at 15-18 % [[possibly 20-22%) unemployment, and still rising. and what "chinese wind generation manufacturers" are you talking about?

Ah, gp and rb, things have been going so great in our economy, with its actual 17% unemployment, that you are asking for more of the same. More wars, more debt, more crazy government programs like Fannie and Freddie. Why if it wasn't for the privately owned and non-transparent Fed pouring money into the economy to sustain its owners' banks, how would the ultra-rich continue to gain advantage over us? Printing a lot of money distorts the economy so that misallocations are made [[bubbles) but it sure sells a lot of home to flippers. Let's continue to encourage illegal immigration while exporting ever more of our jobs so uppity US workers will never have the leverage to demand pay increases. NAFTA and GATT have done so much for US working people. I realize you didn't learn about supply and demand in Marxism class. A dollar worth of 1964 US coins is now worth $11.71 melted because they were made of 90% silver but you would rather have paper to allow the government to cover its uncontrolled spending with inflation. Gasoline consequently costs 1171% more today with your precious federal reserve notes than it does with 1964 silver certificates which should pleasure masochists. Congress would even have to ask taxpayers for tax increases to have new illegal wars and goofy new programs like cash for clunkers if it couldn't just print money like Uganda. Better?

Many tea party activists seem to understand these things. Mill Maher and his smug audience don't. Neither do you it seems.

The 10th Amendment is no a straw man argument gp. It is a part of the Constitution that has been ignored by both parties. Obviously you don't want to knock yourself out voting for candidates who will observe their oath of office but if you want to cut the debt it is an outstanding elixir.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Printing a lot of money distorts the economy so that misallocations are made [[bubbles) but it sure sells a lot of home to flippers.

---

Good for you--you're learning macroeconomics. That's what monetary policy is--the central bank regulates the flow of money through the economy. When the economy rebounds, they will WITHDRAW money from circulation so that inflation doesn't go through the roof. When the federal funds rate is as low as it can go, though, there's really only one other way to create liquidity in the economy, which is--you guessed it--printing money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Let's continue to encourage illegal immigration while exporting ever more of our jobs so uppity US workers will never have the leverage to demand pay increases. NAFTA and GATT have done so much for US working people.

---

I don't know why you're so hung up on illegal immigration. I do not personally support illegal immigration, but I also do not support employers who refuse to pay so-called "living wages", and I do not support aggressive moves by state governments to infringe on workers' rights to organize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

The 10th Amendment is no a straw man argument gp. It is a part of the Constitution that has been ignored by both parties.

---

So, hire an attorney. Bring suit in federal court against the government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

A dollar worth of 1964 US coins is now worth $11.71 melted because they were made of 90% silver but you would rather have paper to allow the government to cover its uncontrolled spending with inflation. Gasoline consequently costs 1171% more today with your precious federal reserve notes than it does with 1964 silver certificates which should pleasure masochists.

---

True, a 1964 or previous year quarter is worth more than a gallon of gasoline. Imagine that, less than 25 cents a gallon using real money. But inflation and federal reserve funny money has multiplied the price by 10 in 45 years. So ghettopalmetto, how is it again that the federal reserve somehow reigns in that inflation? Their method works great huh? They've really got a great track record there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsmith

True, a 1964 or previous year quarter is worth more than a gallon of gasoline. Imagine that, less than 25 cents a gallon using real money. But inflation and federal reserve funny money has multiplied the price by 10 in 45 years. So ghettopalmetto, how is it again that the federal reserve somehow reigns in that inflation? Their method works great huh? They've really got a great track record there.

---

Modern monetary policy shoots for a target inflation rate, generally agreed-upon as 2%, to keep the economy stable.

If you really want to return to 1964 prices, we can find a way to lower your income to say, $6000 a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

When the economy rebounds, they will WITHDRAW money from circulation so that inflation doesn't go through the roof. When the federal funds rate is as low as it can go, though, there's really only one other way to create liquidity in the economy, which is--you guessed it--printing money.

---

Bingo, Let's be like Uganda and counterfeit money. One problem is that the Fed has a history, except under Volker, of keeping the rate too low for too long thus helping create bubbles. The most solvent state, by the way, is North Dakota which has its own state bank. The 10th Amendment makes room for that and it seems to work out better in ND than has the Fed has in the US. Why you would be cheer leading for an outfit owned by the likes of the Bank of America and Goldman Sachs I don't know. I just assume that the Fed serves its owners first and us as an afterthought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

I don't know why you're so hung up on illegal immigration. I do not personally support illegal immigration, but I also do not support employers who refuse to pay so-called "living wages", and I do not support aggressive moves by state governments to infringe on workers' rights to organize.

---

Besides illegality, the supply/demand situation it creates for working Americans is economically devastating. My solution is not so much fences and chasing around illegal aliens is as it is to severely punish their cheating employers. They could be a new source of government revenue while imprisoned. Were that done, the jobs that Americans won't do for illegal alien wages would mostly dry up, Americans blue collar wages would rise, unions would be empowered, and the government could cut back on unemployment and welfare costs. American workers would then recieve a larger slice of the national economic pie.

I am the one here looking out for American workers, preventing inflation, ending wars. You are on the other side, advocating for the elites and their status quo.

Just watched the video of a bunch of tea partiers abusing an apparent Parkinson's sufferer. They disgust me.

I have come across these salad-tossers on several occasions here in DC. Just one question for the Teabaggers.....I don’t see any Tyrones, Muhammeds, Pedros, Patels, and Juans. Where are they? All I see is a bunch of Steves, Brendas, Rogers, and Donalds. By the way, you do know what the term “teabagging” really means don’t you?

Do you think the teabaggers learned the history of their fake movement from the dumbed down Texas textbooks??

Tea Partiers Mock Parkinson's Victim [[Video)

"Inhumane" :[[

Most teabaggers still can't get over the fact that a Black man is the President of their beloved nation. That is what a lot of their rage boils down to really. Where were they when Bush was pissing away billions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Tea Partiers Mock Parkinson's Victim [[Video)

"Inhumane" :[[

---

That video is sickening.

Yes, the video is sickening, but illustrates the dangers of a movement based on fear. These people are fearful. They see their world crumbling, and wish to hold on to what little they have. "I got mine, screw you."
Their behavior reminds one of that of the brown shirts in Germany, who the tea baggers' parents and grandparents fought in WWII.

These teabaggers are just white supremacist dressed up as revolutionary patriots so that they can be seen as socially acceptable and thus give their fake movement some mainstream creditability. These folks wouldn't know a patriot even if he walked down the street toward them singing "yankee doodle dandy"

Washington [[CNN) - Civil rights icon and veteran Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia, said anti-health care bill protesters Saturday repeatedly yelled the "N" word at him as he left a heath care meeting and walked to the Capitol.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...id=UaI7YkOBQNi


This shows their true colors in plain view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick

Washington [[CNN) - Civil rights icon and veteran Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia, said anti-health care bill protesters Saturday repeatedly yelled the "N" word at him as he left a heath care meeting and walked to the Capitol.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...id=UaI7YkOBQNi


This shows their true colors in plain view.

---

I saw this on Yahoo news and could not believe there were still people like this. I guess I should know better but damn. All these people need a pair of sweaty balls shoved in their face.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3...ard/teabag.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstandten

Do you think the teabaggers learned the history of their fake movement from the dumbed down Texas textbooks??

---

Maybe, because the original Tea Party here was about taxation without representation in Parliament. If today's teabaggers think they are not represented, they need to get some candidates and run them. Or they could move to Rep. Broun's parallel universe.
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/ar...aggression.php

if a slight increase in taxes saved our health care system and set our country back on the tracks...what's the problem..we are still under taxed according to many other industrial nations...and if a tax increase increases the productivity of workers through stimulus funds and HCR [[< loss time in ER or loss of work after an illness gets into a life or death situation) then so be it...

when the last great generation fixed through sacrifice and hard work the effects of WWII we all were on the same pages, we have since then lost that spirit..it was replaced with the greed that is on display today...we lost a fight for the soul of our nation when we gave up "regulations and government" to corporations and bonuses that are obscene...

the true "colors" of the teabaggers comes out more and more each day...you have to ask yourself who is more concerned with valuing each other...Teabaggers or those who want to see health care extended to all equally and justly....if it is deficeit spending your concerned about...well then boycott all spending for foreign countries that make a mockery of our government and place a workable tariff on certain big ticket goods that would benefit our local economies...

Here is some irony....today when i drove through, a small group of Teabaggers were bitching at the Capitol surounded by thousands of Latinos protesting for fair immigration reform.

nothing wrong with bitching, its an American right.
racial slurs on the other hand are over the line

I fully support their right to protest. I even support the right of fetus freaks to protest. What these ~~~~~~~~~s are doing is another thing completely. Showing their true colors.

What I find interesting is that they lack any damage control. If they were going to become truly effective they would have been advised that this behavior is counterproductive. Or if this behavior were committed by outsiders, the outsiders would have been excluded before the event hit the stage. Apparently neither is the case.

I think they've been led to believe that they have some kind of clandestine, powerful support which doesn't actually exist. They're being exploited in a way that will benefit neither themselves nor whomever is exploiting them. It's desperation.

It may be entertaining drama but they're obviously defenseless, in a PR sense.

It's a distraction from something else more significant, IMHO. :cool:

The other link I posted went dead so here's another: Bill Maher comments on the tea party bagger movement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

The Bush tax cuts, on the other hand, WERE an attempt to buy votes. We had a tremendous opportunity to pay down national debt [[you know, that thing that conservatives are suddenly SO concerned about). At the end of the Clinton administration, it was projected we would have a net $1 trillion budget surplus over ten years. Where did all that money go??? Oh, that's right--tax cuts for rich people to buy investment homes with risky mortgages that banks could sell as packaged derivatives....

---

That whole projected budget surplus was just that, "projected". It was based on the assumption that the capital gains from the "dot bombs" that occurred in the late nineties were just going to keep growing forever at an exponential rate. Once the dot bombs crashed, that whole projected surplus went up in smoke. By the second year of Bush tax cuts, income tax collections were higher than they were under Clinton, but nowhere near the rosy projections of dot bombs forever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

That whole projected budget surplus was just that, "projected". It was based on the assumption that the capital gains from the "dot bombs" that occurred in the late nineties were just going to keep growing forever at an exponential rate. Once the dot bombs crashed, that whole projected surplus went up in smoke.

---

actually, the projections were made AFTER the dotcom meltdown of the late 90s.

Quote:

---

By the second year of Bush tax cuts, income tax collections were higher than they were under Clinton, but nowhere near the rosy projections of dot bombs forever.

---

are you talking 2002 or 2003, what is your source and are you talking individual, corporate, both, state, local, federal or total?

I will give you a hint -- corporate taxes were down, individual up [[made up for by higher taxes on low and lower middle incomes)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Tea Partiers Mock Parkinson's Victim [[Video)

"Inhumane" :[[

---

Targeted by the Tea Party: Parkinson's Hero Speaks

I didn't know Mahr was a racist. Too bad his interpatation of our president was just that. I don't expect any better from good ol southern party members.The only thing that has changed is your tactics. Your goal remains the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Targeted by the Tea Party: Parkinson's Hero Speaks

---

If these people are actually part of the tea party then its a shame. But, considering the left announced they were going to infiltrate the Tea Party and do things just like this to try and discredit them, I don't buy it.
We haqve seen the peaceful left in action alright. Seems like peace is a different definition in their dictionary. Kind of like the twilight zone.
Especially since all but this one time there have been nothing but peaceful protests.

Next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumplingDude

If these people are actually part of the tea party then its a shame. But, considering the left announced they were going to infiltrate the Tea Party and do things just like this to try and discredit them, I don't buy it.
We haqve seen the peaceful left in action alright. Seems like peace is a different definition in their dictionary. Kind of like the twilight zone.
Especially since all but this one time there have been nothing but peaceful protests.

Next.

---

So you don't actually care to defend the folks who JUST SO HAPPEN to have chosen the same political beliefs and invective as you? It's all the fault of the Evil Left, correct?

Poor innocent widdle Tea Partiers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

I could never stomach Maher, even when I agreed with what he was saying. His snide, uncouth manner is very unappealing. He just seems like a very condescending miserable little man.

---

So what comedians do you like? Most comics have far worse language than Maher.

gnome: That said, I wish the TP people would slink back to their respective trailers as I see them nothing more than another version of BAMN or ACORN ... folks who just like to feel important by screaming; and a far as Bill maher goes,... isn't he the male version of Madana's attention-whore complex? He was funny and insightful for a hot minute in 1999. Since then he has been a shanker on the lip of political discourse.

Bill Maher has had some good people on his show: Cornel West, Solmon Rushie, Andrew Sullivan, Michael Moore, Cory Booker, S.E. Cupp...

And ACORN advocates for the poor mostly for housing and voter registration. They must bhave been doing something right to get the rightwing after them.

gnome: How do you poll a group that isn't a group?

You go to their convention.

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/08/b...nashville.html

maxx, I found another Canadian author to complement the Canadian Newsweek writer. Steyn writes in the US as Canadian censors are getting too powerful for him to write there.

sample: "If the Tea Partiers were truly the murderous goons they've been portrayed as, they would draw the obvious lesson from the kid gloves with which Comedy Central strokes Islam. They would say, "Enough with peaceful rallies where we pick up the litter afterwards. Let's just threaten to decapitate someone. You get more respect that way. At least from the media."
But they won't do that. Because, notwithstanding their outrageous demonization by the media, they're not terrorists. So, in the end, Comedy Central has incentivized Islamic violence and nothing much else."
- Mark Steyn: Tea Party the new front in 'war on terror'

Oladub:
I'm not aware of anyone calling them "murderous". Maher characterized them as clueless and the Newsweek reporter said they were conspiracy theorists in tin foil hats.

What about President Clinton? He tried to link those who believe that government is the biggest threat to freedom with potential violence in the way he blamed talk radio for inciting Timothy McVeigh.

While not explicitly calling the tea partiers "murderous", Clinton claims that the Oklahoma bombers “were profoundly alienated, disconnected people who bought into this militant antigovernment line.� and warns that the tea partiers' “ belief that the greatest threat to American freedom is our government� is the motive of murderous terrorists. Let's just say that Clinton strongly infers and suggests that tea partiers are setting the stage, like Rush did, for another Oklahoma City.

Would that be the same Clinton that allowed the man that killed 3000 of our people to get away 3 times?

Just askin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

What about President Clinton? He tried to link those who believe that government is the biggest threat to freedom with potential violence in the way he blamed talk radio for inciting Timothy McVeigh.

While not explicitly calling the tea partiers "murderous", Clinton claims that the Oklahoma bombers “were profoundly alienated, disconnected people who bought into this militant antigovernment line.� and warns that the tea partiers' “ belief that the greatest threat to American freedom is our government� is the motive of murderous terrorists. Let's just say that Clinton strongly infers and suggests that tea partiers are setting the stage, like Rush did, for another Oklahoma City.

---

I guess Clinton's remarks may not be far off the mark if you happen to believe that, for instance, rightwing invective encouraged the murders of the women's clinic doctors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumplingDude

Would that be the same Clinton that allowed the man that killed 3000 of our people to get away 3 times?

---

And when I mention the Bush family, I'm talking about the family that is in bed with the bin Ladens. Makes you wonder how hard W was trying to get Osama when he starts a pre-emptive war in another part of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxx

And when I mention the Bush family, I'm talking about the family that is in bed with the bin Ladens. Makes you wonder how hard W was trying to get Osama when he starts a pre-emptive war in another part of the world.

---

Well now that would also be the Clintons wouldn't it? Considering they received untold millions from sources in the middle east for Billy's library and who knows how much for Billy to look the other way when other Nations were trying to hand Bin Laden over to the U.S. prior to 9/11.
Just maybe if it weren't for Bill looking the other way we would still have the twin towers and 3000 American lives. Children would still have their parents and families would still have their loved ones.
Only people with self serving interests would look the other way when an international terrorist and criminal were being handed over to us for prosecution.
Stew on that for a while instead of protecting Billy boy.
I know the Bush's had interest in oil. But as far as them being pals with Bin Laden that is yet to be proven. If anything, it looks like Bill was the chummy one with that family. I guess I'd turn the other way too if I had been paid off but then again, I have morals and a heart. I can't be bought so scratch that thought.

Tea partiers were chanting something about how they didn't like the bailout and the next thing you know violence breaks out. One of the tea partiers even had a sign that read "NO BAILOUT BP'. Isn't this the anger>violence paradign Bill Clinton warned us about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpxKh...layer_embedded

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumplingDude

Well now that would also be the Clintons wouldn't it? Considering they received untold millions from sources in the middle east for Billy's library and who knows how much for Billy to look the other way when other Nations were trying to hand Bin Laden over to the U.S. prior to 9/11.

---

sources, please? oh, you don't have any

I suggest you read a book called House of Bush/House of Saud

Odub,

The link to that video was removed.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.asp

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/saudi.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Odub, The link to that video was removed.

---

Thanks, A similar video is still up on a local TV station. http://www.myfox8.com/news/wghp-prot...,3507781.story The thug is Governor Spencer an elected union official. This is the third such video of different events I've found. The other thugs where white.

"Barack Obama [[and cronies) gave his marching orders:
“They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun�, “Get in Their Faces!�, “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!�, “Hit Back Twice As Hard�, Obama to BP: “We talk to these folks… So I know whose a$$ to kick.�
Now it’s playing out on the streets." -Jim Hoft

http://irldefender.files.wordpress.c...orses-ass1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

thug is Governor Spencer an elected union official. This is the third such video of different events I've found.

---

"thug" huh? that video is so grainy, so obviously chopped, it is hard to say what was going on. interesting that the tabor guy admits to turning off the camera while he confronted the guy who was putting the blame where it belongs, only to turn it on again in time for the alleged punch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

"thug" huh? that video is so grainy, so obviously chopped, it is hard to say what was going on. interesting that the tabor guy admits to turning off the camera while he confronted the guy who was putting the blame where it belongs, only to turn it on again in time for the alleged punch

---

rb, It is interesting that you take the side of the assaulter.

The earlier YouTube video had the camera being knocked around by the Obama thug at close range. The one you saw shows the guy being punched while holding his camera in one hand . Think about it. The segment showing him being punched in the face was obviously taken by a different camera. Since only one person was throwing punches, the punching bag has a lot of witnesses, there are at least two videos recording the event, and the police came along and probably collected some witness statements to the effect that the Obama thug shoved the guy's wife, the Obama thug is going to have a tough time defending himself.

I didn't read all the posts here so I apologize if someone already mentioned this, but isn't Mahers statement only true because he's using dollar figures and not a stat based on percentage? People have made less money, hence they pay less taxes. Isn't that actually what has happened? I know that my wife and I paid less in the last year, but we paid a higher percentage of our income. We made less over the year because she is laid off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

rb, It is interesting that you take the side of the assaulter.

The earlier YouTube video had the camera being knocked around by the Obama thug at close range. The one you saw shows the guy being punched while holding his camera in one hand . Think about it. The segment showing him being punched in the face was obviously taken by a different camera. Since only one person was throwing punches, the punching bag has a lot of witnesses, there are at least two videos recording the event, and the police came along and probably collected some witness statements to the effect that the Obama thug shoved the guy's wife, the Obama thug is going to have a tough time defending himself.

---

not taking sides at all, just saying what can be seen in the video ain't the whole story and isn't very clear. The majority of people there were on the one guy's side, and could well have edited what they put up as well. you choose to believe one side with clearly altered video in support, I merely said the whole story isn't there. if it turns out the one guy hit the other without being shoved, then yes, he was a thug. are you willing to say that if your guy instigated the thing by shoving that he is a thug?

didn't think so

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

rb, It is interesting that you take the side of the assaulter.

The earlier YouTube video had the camera being knocked around by the Obama thug at close range. The one you saw shows the guy being punched while holding his camera in one hand . Think about it. The segment showing him being punched in the face was obviously taken by a different camera. Since only one person was throwing punches, the punching bag has a lot of witnesses, there are at least two videos recording the event, and the police came along and probably collected some witness statements to the effect that the Obama thug shoved the guy's wife, the Obama thug is going to have a tough time defending himself.

---

Biased much? Obama thug? Christ, I imagine that Obama paid him to do that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

not taking sides at all, just saying what can be seen in the video ain't the whole story and isn't very clear. The majority of people there were on the one guy's side, and could well have edited what they put up as well. you choose to believe one side with clearly altered video in support, I merely said the whole story isn't there. if it turns out the one guy hit the other without being shoved, then yes, he was a thug. are you willing to say that if your guy instigated the thing by shoving that he is a thug?

didn't think so

---

Edited by the news crew most likely, but what was altered? I only saw one guy acting like a mugger attacking someone who was holding a camera in one hand. If the mugger had shoved the guy's wife, it wouldn't have been unreasonable for her husband to defend her. What was totally unreasonable was the assault.

Quote:

---

Stosh: "Biased much? Obama thug? Christ, I imagine that Obama paid him to do that?

---

Stosh, You're right. Perhaps Governor Spencer, the mugger, wasn't an Obama supporter. Maybe he voted for McCain.

What's with the snapshot from your porno file?

Speaking of Bill Maher, he had Oliver Stone on his show last night. Stone's latest movie "South of the Border" has W giving the real reason we invaded Iraq. W said that war is good for the American economy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_592444.html

Keep voting Republican and get more of the great economy war brings. And more tax cuts for the rich. And less money for schools, the FDA, and the EPA.

Quote: "Keep voting Republican and get more of the great economy war brings."

We have a Democratic President and congress and have had for the last year and a half. About 1/2 the duration of WWII. Just how long does it take to end this senseless "war" as our President claimed it was during his campaign? When he promised over and over to end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. He's escalated it. And now he's threatening Iran at the urging of a democratically controlled congress. We can get ready for four more years of this jake leg, he's a prime ball player and shoe-in for the win in 2012.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Stosh, You're right. Perhaps Governor Spencer, the mugger, wasn't an Obama supporter. Maybe he voted for McCain.

---

I am sure that you know of countless other assholes that are roaming the streets any hour of the day assaulting people, of any political persuasion known to man, and you pick this douch e as a prime example? I suppose that there's no point talking to you, your head is up the [[continued)

Quote:

---

What's with the snapshot from your porno file?

---

porn shot from my "porno file" , as you call it, above.
Only you would be able to draw that analogy. I'm not seeing the attraction. It may be a Wisconsin fetish. Or maybe even some sort of closet libertarian thing?
I'm not judging, I mean I'm sure it gets lonely up there on your farm and all....:D

Quote:

---

Stosh: "I am sure that you know of countless other assholes that are roaming the streets any hour of the day assaulting people, of any political persuasion known to man, and you pick this douch e as a prime example? I suppose that there's no point talking to you, your head is up the [[continued)"

---

At least you called him a '~~~~~~ e' and didn't defend him like rb. The theme though was Clinton warning us of violence that might stem from the tea party movement. With a little twist, maybe he was right. This guy was just the most recent example. I appreciate irony.

Quote:

---

"porn shot from my "porno file" , as you call it, above.
Only you would be able to draw that analogy. I'm not seeing the attraction. It may be a Wisconsin fetish. Or maybe even some sort of closet libertarian thing?
I'm not judging, I mean I'm sure it gets lonely up there on your farm and all....:D "

---

Umm, I didn't post it. It just reminded me of Democrats.http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:v...eft_donkey.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

At least you called him a '~~~~~~ e' and didn't defend him like rb. The theme though was Clinton warning us of violence that might stem from the tea party movement. With a little twist, maybe he was right. This guy was just the most recent example. I appreciate irony.

---

There's violence inherent in everybody. Calling the ignorant fool a "Obama Thug" is just like me calling you a boot licking Randian parasite. Not that I would, of course. :p

Umm, I didn't post it. It just reminded me of Democrats.http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:v...eft_donkey.gif[/quote]

I like that logo. Of course there's always this gem.

http://www.leftycartoons.com/wp-cont...rians_vote.png

oladub: The earlier YouTube video had the camera being knocked around by the Obama thug at close range.

maxx: So the President is responsible for every nut who claims to support him? He could be a Republican trying to give liberals a bad name. So then are all the Tea-Partyers who employed Brown Shirt tactics at the hearings Palin thugs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxx

oladub: The earlier YouTube video had the camera being knocked around by the Obama thug at close range.

maxx: So the President is responsible for every nut who claims to support him? He could be a Republican trying to give liberals a bad name. So then are all the Tea-Partyers who employed Brown Shirt tactics at the hearings Palin thugs?

---

Sure, Governor Spencer "could be a Republican trying to give liberals a bad name";). The President certainly isn't responsible unless one would listen to President Clinton who warned us about how rhetoric can lead to violence. The following rhetoric might qualify,

“They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun�, “Get in Their Faces!�, “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!�, “Hit Back Twice As Hard�, Obama to BP: “We talk to these folks… So I know whose a$$ to kick.�

Be angry, bring a gun, hit back twice as hard, and kick ass are President Obama's directives. That's how to bring us together [[very presidential too), So we can see how, in this case, this Obamatron thug was just following the President's directives by hitting back twice as hard. Shoving a woman was just a little indiscretion but I think within limits. So no, I don't think that President Obama is directly responsible because I don't agree with Clinton. Without Clinton's comments, I would write the incident off as another independent left leaning brownshirt acting out.

Quote:

---

stosh: "I like that logo."

---

I suppose you did.

Re libertarians and Republicans. There is a some merging going on but as you may have noticed the RNC has been losing some battles with more libertarian elements in Kentucky, Maine, and most recently Nevada. In Nevada, Sue Lowden just got her payback for throwing the State's Republican convention for McCain so a more libertarian candidate will face Harry Reid. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say these are libertarian candidates beating the neocons. They are candidates who position themselves between libertarians and more mainstream Republicans. Democrats should be happy that the more neocon Bush, Cheney, Giuliani type wing of the party is being turned out to pasture.

Now why on earth would you not like these tactics?

Quote:

---

---

Quote:

---

“They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun�, “Get in Their Faces!�, “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!�, “Hit Back Twice As Hard�, Obama to BP: “We talk to these folks… So I know whose a$$ to kick.�

---

These are the same tactics employed by the Republicans, AND Libertarians. It's not so much a good thing when it is used against you, is it? Get used to it.
Unless, of course, there's some sort of "come to Jesus" moment among the neocons... and the analists of the Libertarian Party, of course.

oladub:
I'm not talking rhetoric. I'm talking about people shouting down anyone who is trying to talk. Our whole democracy is supposedly based on reasoned dialogue and debate, but the rightwing loonies just want to vent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stosh

Now why on earth would you not like these tactics?

These are the same tactics employed by the Republicans, AND Libertarians. It's not so much a good thing when it is used against you, is it? Get used to it.
Unless, of course, there's some sort of "come to Jesus" moment among the neocons... and the analists of the Libertarian Party, of course.

---

Neocon Republicans for sure but except for some Ron Paulers chasing Hannity with snowballs, I'm hard pressed to think of libertarians using such threats. Mostly they would prefer being left alone to using government as a tool to steal from their neighbors.

"Get used to it" Ah, now you've got the Obama spirit. When is Kristallnacht scheduled? A horsey picture, you like donkey pictures too, an anal reference, and even telling us to get used to Obama's thugs. A pattern emerges. You have managed to make 'change we can believe in' sound too much like a sado/masochist fantasy. Sorry, libertarians aren't into either end of the fantasy.

Quote:

---

maxx: "I'm not talking rhetoric. I'm talking about people shouting down anyone who is trying to talk. Our whole democracy is supposedly based on reasoned dialogue and debate, but the rightwing loonies just want to vent."

---

It is a republic not a democracy. The democratic process is not furthered, however, by calling people loonies or worse [[read Stosh stuff) not that rightwingers have a monopoly on venting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oladub

Neocon Republicans for sure but except for some Ron Paulers chasing Hannity with snowballs, I'm hard pressed to think of libertarians using such threats. Mostly they would prefer being left alone to using government as a tool to steal from their neighbors.

---

Really? and who appointed you the spokesperson for every so called "libertarian" on the planet? Too often the term is quite interchangeable with Republican, or conservative. I'd like to see you back that up. Of course you can't.

Quote:

---

"Get used to it" Ah, now you've got the Obama spirit. When is Kristallnacht scheduled? A horsey picture, you like donkey pictures too, an anal reference, and even telling us to get used to Obama's thugs. A pattern emerges. You have managed to make 'change we can believe in' sound too much like a sado/masochist fantasy. Sorry, libertarians aren't into either end of the fantasy.

---

Yes, of course, it's all about the horse, donkey, and elephant shit now isn't it. Anal is, as anal does, and you've cornered the market on that, as well as the shit concession, it seems. It's beginning to sound like you know waaayyyy too much about this brand of porn. Bestiality doesn't suit you. Stick to what you are more comfortable with, a clear Obama fetish love/hate relationship.

Quote:

---

It is a republic not a democracy. The democratic process is not furthered, however, by calling people loonies or worse [[read Stosh stuff) not that rightwingers have a monopoly on venting.

---

I call it as I see it.
You are right, it is a republic. Which means you have no voice, and are dependent on government to govern, the way people vote them in. Must suck to be you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stosh

Really? and who appointed you the spokesperson for every so called "libertarian" on the planet? Too often the term is quite interchangeable with Republican, or conservative. I'd like to see you back that up. Of course you can't..

---

You did. Not sure what you are otherwise talking about. Republican has to do with a party too statist, at the moment, for my taste although not quite as bad as the Democrat Party but only by degree. Libertarian [[small L) is the opposite of authoritarian. I'm by no means a libertarian purist but am probably closer to the libertarian end of the libertarian-authoritarian spectrum than you.

Quote:

---

Yes, of course, it's all about the horse, donkey, and elephant shit now isn't it. Anal is, as anal does, and you've cornered the market on that, as well as the shit concession, it seems. It's beginning to sound like you know waaayyyy too much about this brand of porn. Bestiality doesn't suit you. Stick to what you are more comfortable with, a clear Obama fetish love/hate relationship.

---

All stuff you, not I, brought into the conversation. Don't forget to include your classic Ãœbermensch quote, ""Get used to it". My critique of Bush was much the same for his wars, spending, bailout; things I criticize Obama for but since Bush hasn't been President for 17 months, what's the point of keeping that up?

Quote:

---

I call it as I see it.
You are right, it is a republic. Which means you have no voice, and are dependent on government to govern, the way people vote them in. Must suck to be you

---

Actually, the advantage of a constitutional republic as opposed to a peoples democracy is that individuals and minorities are guaranteed a measure of protection from the tyranny of the majority. Why imagine what other's are thinking though? Is it necessary to justify saying something like, "Get used to it" in reference to justifying thugs or even thug events? Or is just in the hopeychangey spirit of, “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun�, “Get in Their Faces!�, “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!�, “Hit Back Twice As Hard�, and So I know whose a$$ to kick.� ?

oladub: It is a republic not a democracy.

maxx: Actually it is a corporatocracy, run by businesses and for businesses. The sooner the average person realizes that, the sooner we can stop arguing with each other and demand a change in the way elections are funded and get back our government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

I could never stomach Maher, even when I agreed with what he was saying. His snide, uncouth manner is very unappealing. He just seems like a very condescending miserable little man.

---

Pot meet kettle

http://www.naacp.org/news/entry/naac...-the-tea-pary/
"Today, NAACP delegates passed a resolution to condemn extremist elements within the Tea Party, calling on Tea Party leaders to repudiate those in their ranks who use racist language in their signs and speeches...."

[finally]