Skip to Next Poll »
7
What is the TEA Party Movement? Do the member wants bloody revolution? americans vs. americans (Edited 05/29/10 08:32AM by )

Boston Tea Party

Think way back to high school history class when your teacher was going on about the Boston Tea Party. It all started back in 1773 when the British tried to place a huge tax on tea exported to Britain. A group of colonists boarded the ships and dumped the tea into the harbor. Their complaint was “no taxation without representation.” They felt that they should not be taxed without adequate representation at the government level. It is a very important part of American history and was one of the catalysts to the Revolutionary War. 

New Tea Party

In early 2009 a growing discontent with the way the government was spending money began to bubble up all over the country. Soon the new Tea Party  formed decrying the stimulus package and other fool-hardy spending by the US government. Their main goal is to promote fiscal conservatism. The AIG bonus scandal fanned the flames and the party membership exploded.
Sarah Palin has touted the Tea Party movement as the “future of politics in America” in a speech she gave at the inaugural Tea Party convention. She also stated that it would do the Republican party some good to adopt the philosophy of the Tea Party. Even scarier, the potential for Sarah Palin to run for president on the Tea Party ticket.  With Americans growing unhappy with way President Obama is spending taxpayer money and trying to push healthcare reform, the Tea Party is looking better and better.
The Tea Party’s goal is simply to revive and perpetuate Bush and Reagan economic policy-tax cuts for the rich and deregulation for corporations. Yet, when these free market fundamentalists fail i.e. S&L, the housing and banking crsis, the insider trading scandals of the 1980s or accounting fraud of Enron and WorldCom,  the middle class taxpayers will end up having to save everyone, including the screwups i.e. Keating, Milken, the Wall Street boys.

| Closed on 06/26/10 at 05:00PM
FanIQ Pts? No | Locker Room, Entertainment | Multiple Choice Opinion Poll
14 Fans 
50%a. errrrrr
14%b. ahhhhhh
36%c. hmmmmmmmm

 &nbp;
TOP COMMENT * * * * * * * * * * * *
#1 | 1618 days ago

Basically, it is the hard working people of America finally standing up to the government and saying "enough is enough!"  Either our elected representatives do the WILL of the PEOPLE or they will find themselves out of a job!  To assume that the Tea Party movement(which means Taxed Enough Already) is advocating armed insurrection is typical Liberal propaganda!  And, if you go back and do research, the Reagan tax cuts were for all tax brackets, not just the wealthy!  And, due to those cuts, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth, which lasted until the dot com collapse of 2000.
  
287 Comments | Sorted by Most Recent First | Red = You Disagreed
Vote for your favorite comments. Fans decide the Top Comment (3+ votes) and also hide poor quality comments (4+ votes).
#1 | 1618 days ago

Basically, it is the hard working people of America finally standing up to the government and saying "enough is enough!"  Either our elected representatives do the WILL of the PEOPLE or they will find themselves out of a job!  To assume that the Tea Party movement(which means Taxed Enough Already) is advocating armed insurrection is typical Liberal propaganda!  And, if you go back and do research, the Reagan tax cuts were for all tax brackets, not just the wealthy!  And, due to those cuts, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth, which lasted until the dot com collapse of 2000.
#2 | 1618 days ago

vantiffin52 wrote:
Basically, it is the hard working people of America finally standing up to the government and saying "enough is enough!"  Either our elected representatives do the WILL of the PEOPLE or they will find themselves out of a job!  To assume that the Tea Party movement(which means Taxed Enough Already) is advocating armed insurrection is typical Liberal propaganda!  And, if you go back and do research, the Reagan tax cuts were for all tax brackets, not just the wealthy!  And, due to those cuts, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth, which lasted until the dot com collapse of 2000.

I think the ideology of the tea party is for good intention, but for it to be exploited by politicians is not a very good idea.. dont you think so?

#3 | 1618 days ago

I'll be honest, I don't follow it, other than whats on the news. When it first started in, Feb-March? 2009 .... I only remember, mainly senior citizens, complaining about losing their insurance. Since then, it seems to have changed.
#4 | 1618 days ago

Now I know.

hmmmmmmmm  
#5 | 1618 days ago

No the tea party is not for bloody revolution.  They are the  most peaceful Americans and believe to make changes, we do it  by voting our wishes.
errrrrr  
#6 | 1618 days ago

As with any group, there are some fanatics that show up at rallys.  The heart and sole of The Tea Party is less taxes, less intrusive government.  More fiscal responsibility.  Which means decisions will have to be made regarding budget cuts.  Somebodies pets are gonna be reduced.  You can not reduce revenue without reducing spending.  Alex, you said it when you commented about listening to the news.  The news media will only allow you to see snipits of events.  Taking the most inflammatory moments.  Read the "whole book" before believing what you hear.
#7 | 1618 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
As I have stated before- I actually attended the "Tea Party Express" led by Sarah Palin here in Las Vegas- and I gave my opinion based upon my observations..... All I can say is that I have YET to see ANY Tea Party leaders or "activists" ever give ANY SOLUTIONS on how to fix what THEY feel is wrong with this Country.  They say Government is too big- duh- we know that- how will YOU fix it? They say government spends to much- dud- we know that- what programs will you cut to fix it? They say immigration is bad- duh- we know that- what will we do to fix it? Etc,etc.....    As I said, it's easy to point the finger at the problem- but where are the SOLUTIONS?

Plus every "Leader" of the Tea Party is actually a "leader" of the Republican Party so I really see no difference or message in the two. Just seems like a bunch or angry Republicans who are pissed off that they aren't in charge anymore - and NOTHING more.

Also I don't buy into the "Hard Working Americans standing up against the Government argument at all"! For one, MOST of the money to financially back this Party is coming from Corporations such as Shell Oil CEO"s and Koch Industries. And two- the "Average" Tea Partier makes WELL ABOVE the "average salary" in this Country- with MOST of them making $60,000 a year or more. Not saying that some of these people aren't "Hard Working Americans"- but they most definitely don't qualify as your typical "blue- collar worker" either! 
hmmmmmmmm  
#8 | 1618 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
vantiffin52 wrote:
Basically, it is the hard working people of America finally standing up to the government and saying "enough is enough!"  Either our elected representatives do the WILL of the PEOPLE or they will find themselves out of a job!  To assume that the Tea Party movement(which means Taxed Enough Already) is advocating armed insurrection is typical Liberal propaganda!  And, if you go back and do research, the Reagan tax cuts were for all tax brackets, not just the wealthy!  And, due to those cuts, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth, which lasted until the dot com collapse of 2000.
Ummm just to be FACTUAL here as far as President Reagan is concerned and how " due to those cuts in taxes, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth"-   President Reagan (because of those tax cuts) RAISED our National Debt by 20.6 % in 8 years and President Bush II (and his tax cuts) RAISED our National Debt by 27% in 8 years. Funny how "Conservatives" clearly FORGET to point out what actually happened to this Country as a result of those enormous tax cuts......

(Source: Whitehouse FY 2011 Budget - Table 7.1 Federal Debt at the End of Year PDF, Excel)

Now compare the National Debt to President Clinton (who was sandwiched in between those two Presidents) and you will see that in his 8 years in office the National Debt DECREASED by 9.7% and yet he did NOT lower taxes, but he DID cut Government spending somewhat. As I've said NUMEROUS TIMES- cutting taxes is not always the best solution to the problem. Yet cutting taxes IS what "Conservatives" THINK is ALWAYS the solution.
hmmmmmmmm  
#9 | 1618 days ago
ssusiej46 (+)

I have read almost all that  you have wrote,  may i ask one thing ,is there anything that you have not done?

#10 | 1618 days ago
vindog (+)

ssusiej46 wrote:

I have read almost all that  you have wrote,  may i ask one thing ,is there anything that you have not done?

Pretty much NO! I've done more in my lifetime than I can think of- and I'm VERY PROUD of that FACT! Thanks for asking though and keep giving those "undercover respects" to EVERYONE that disagrees with me.  Have a great day!
hmmmmmmmm  
#11 | 1618 days ago
ssusiej46 (+)

ssusiej46 wrote:

I have read almost all that  you have wrote,  may i ask one thing ,is there anything that you have not done?

Yes you can count on it.[Smile]
#12 | 1618 days ago
vindog (+)

Well contrary to popular belief- I actually DO try to be informed of ALL political ideas and sides of the spectrum. So attending a "Tea Party" rally WAS on my list of things to do. And to be honest- I wasn't impressed at all. If I wanted to hear Sarah Palin talk about her "ideas" I could have just re-winded and watched ANY of her speeches from the last 2-3 years- as NOTHING is any different or has changed! All she did was simply changed her "label" - not her thoughts (if she really has any of her own) or her rhetoric. As I said, NO DIFFERENT than any other Republican out there!
hmmmmmmmm  
#13 | 1618 days ago

cuddles127017 wrote:
No the tea party is not for bloody revolution.  They are the  most peaceful Americans and believe to make changes, we do it  by voting our wishes.
but instilling hatred to particular person or group is an aperture for a revolution, and my... we all dont want a chaos in the midst of all this problem.
just maybe if the membership will try to control and focus to the ideology which is a peaceful rally to cut down anything .. then that is a more civilized manner to settle all dispute, isnt it??
#14 | 1618 days ago

Vindog like I said before you alway's make my day, Have a good one buddy,
#15 | 1618 days ago
vindog (+)

jbarr1 wrote:
Vindog like I said before you alway's make my day, Have a good one buddy,
You too.
hmmmmmmmm  
#16 | 1617 days ago

billiePAL1998 wrote:
but instilling hatred to particular person or group is an aperture for a revolution, and my... we all dont want a chaos in the midst of all this problem.
just maybe if the membership will try to control and focus to the ideology which is a peaceful rally to cut down anything .. then that is a more civilized manner to settle all dispute, isnt it??
I don't know where you get your news from Billie but nobody in the tea party is instilling hatred and chaos.  And your last statement made no sense to me what so ever.  All of the tea parties have been very peaceful and they even clean up after themselves before leaving.  You are not well imformed on the tea parties.
errrrrr  
#17 | 1617 days ago

(Edited by billiePAL1998)
cuddles127017 wrote:
I don't know where you get your news from Billie but nobody in the tea party is instilling hatred and chaos.  And your last statement made no sense to me what so ever.  All of the tea parties have been very peaceful and they even clean up after themselves before leaving.  You are not well imformed on the tea parties.
I tried to research on the rallies concerning Tea party, actually it was my husband who educated me regarding this org. at first I was just amused by the emergence but as time progressed and politicians entered the scene.. (even the words coming out from the mouth of these people) are obscene to my standard... if just in the case these politicians become succesful in instilling hatred and people are ignited.. people will be hurt dont you think so?
I still believe that there is a better resolution to all concerns aside from the street parliament.
these are just my ideas and no one else's
#18 | 1617 days ago

billiePAL1998 wrote:
I tried to research on the rallies concerning Tea party, actually it was my husband who educated me regarding this org. at first I was just amused by the emergence but as time progressed and politicians entered the scene.. (even the words coming out from the mouth of these people) are obscene to my standard... if just in the case these politicians become succesful in instilling hatred and people are ignited.. people will be hurt dont you think so?
I still believe that there is a better resolution to all concerns aside from the street parliament.
these are just my ideas and no one else's
No,  That's the way it's done in the USA.
errrrrr  
#19 | 1617 days ago

All posts that were personal insults or attacks toward other users have been removed. Please remember the Code of Conduct, folks. Personal attacks are not tolerated on FanIQ and can lead to account removal. It's understandable that political polls get heated, but people can have civil passionate debates and disagree with people without having to lash out and make it personal. Please be more careful.
#20 | 1617 days ago

Jess wrote:
All posts that were personal insults or attacks toward other users have been removed. Please remember the Code of Conduct, folks. Personal attacks are not tolerated on FanIQ and can lead to account removal. It's understandable that political polls get heated, but people can have civil passionate debates and disagree with people without having to lash out and make it personal. Please be more careful.
wish you luck jess, i dont think you have a prayer this time
#21 | 1616 days ago
ssusiej46 (+)

LOL Thank you
#22 | 1616 days ago

Jess wrote:
All posts that were personal insults or attacks toward other users have been removed. Please remember the Code of Conduct, folks. Personal attacks are not tolerated on FanIQ and can lead to account removal. It's understandable that political polls get heated, but people can have civil passionate debates and disagree with people without having to lash out and make it personal. Please be more careful.
Guess you'll have to delete Vindog then, since all he does is attack personally!  And if CONSTANTLY running down this country and attacking Repulicans is a banning offense, then delete him!
#23 | 1616 days ago
vindog (+)

vantiffin52 wrote:
Guess you'll have to delete Vindog then, since all he does is attack personally!  And if CONSTANTLY running down this country and attacking Repulicans is a banning offense, then delete him!
But your CONSTANT running down of this Country's leaders and attacking Democrats and Liberals IS O.K. to do? Sorry Buddy, but expressing an opinion about a certain topic is NOT a personal attack......But using someone's name in a post for the purpose you just did IS a personal attack!
hmmmmmmmm  
#24 | 1616 days ago

i like history very much, and i know all about your tea party, well, is not a very well description, but the american beguin to kick the ball of the revolution, and all is about taxes, the freedom of the commerce, well in Argentina beguin in 1808 ,and was against Spain , who has a monopoly about all.- War, and whe have the the independece in may 25 1810, in 1813 whe have the declaration for give freedom to the slaves.-hard times ,good times ,
#25 | 1616 days ago

Jess wrote:
All posts that were personal insults or attacks toward other users have been removed. Please remember the Code of Conduct, folks. Personal attacks are not tolerated on FanIQ and can lead to account removal. It's understandable that political polls get heated, but people can have civil passionate debates and disagree with people without having to lash out and make it personal. Please be more careful.
hy dolly dream
#26 | 1615 days ago

 The Tea Party is the base of the Republican party. Nothing more, nothing less.  The fact that the media and others have pretended that its actually something new has been one of the best things to happen to Republicans since Obama became President. Speaking of which, where were these people before then? Oh yeah, that's right, they're just the base of the Republican party.
#27 | 1614 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
hmmmmmmmm  
#28 | 1614 days ago

vindog wrote:
Ummm just to be FACTUAL here as far as President Reagan is concerned and how " due to those cuts in taxes, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth"-   President Reagan (because of those tax cuts) RAISED our National Debt by 20.6 % in 8 years and President Bush II (and his tax cuts) RAISED our National Debt by 27% in 8 years. Funny how "Conservatives" clearly FORGET to point out what actually happened to this Country as a result of those enormous tax cuts......

(Source: Whitehouse FY 2011 Budget - Table 7.1 Federal Debt at the End of Year PDF, Excel)

Now compare the National Debt to President Clinton (who was sandwiched in between those two Presidents) and you will see that in his 8 years in office the National Debt DECREASED by 9.7% and yet he did NOT lower taxes, but he DID cut Government spending somewhat. As I've said NUMEROUS TIMES- cutting taxes is not always the best solution to the problem. Yet cutting taxes IS what "Conservatives" THINK is ALWAYS the solution.
cutting taxes sounds good to the ear but the numbers tell the rest of the story
errrrrr  
#29 | 1614 days ago

Jess wrote:
All posts that were personal insults or attacks toward other users have been removed. Please remember the Code of Conduct, folks. Personal attacks are not tolerated on FanIQ and can lead to account removal. It's understandable that political polls get heated, but people can have civil passionate debates and disagree with people without having to lash out and make it personal. Please be more careful.
if you have something to say...say it , but dont be disrespecting people for thier comments ...otherwise it makes you look like the fool you may be ...so be civil...or carry your ass
#30 | 1613 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

(Edited by NorseHeathen)
^^^^Responding with a personal attack even after the post stated that such was against the Code of Conduct......LOL!  What is even funnier is that this individual responded to the same post four days ago (see post #21)...

Watch out boys and girls, we have a rocket scientist here....
#31 | 1612 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

(Edited by Pop_Tart)
vindog wrote:
As I have stated before- I actually attended the "Tea Party Express" led by Sarah Palin here in Las Vegas- and I gave my opinion based upon my observations..... All I can say is that I have YET to see ANY Tea Party leaders or "activists" ever give ANY SOLUTIONS on how to fix what THEY feel is wrong with this Country.  They say Government is too big- duh- we know that- how will YOU fix it? They say government spends to much- dud- we know that- what programs will you cut to fix it? They say immigration is bad- duh- we know that- what will we do to fix it? Etc,etc.....    As I said, it's easy to point the finger at the problem- but where are the SOLUTIONS?

Plus every "Leader" of the Tea Party is actually a "leader" of the Republican Party so I really see no difference or message in the two. Just seems like a bunch or angry Republicans who are pissed off that they aren't in charge anymore - and NOTHING more.

Also I don't buy into the "Hard Working Americans standing up against the Government argument at all"! For one, MOST of the money to financially back this Party is coming from Corporations such as Shell Oil CEO"s and Koch Industries. And two- the "Average" Tea Partier makes WELL ABOVE the "average salary" in this Country- with MOST of them making $60,000 a year or more. Not saying that some of these people aren't "Hard Working Americans"- but they most definitely don't qualify as your typical "blue- collar worker" either! 
Not to burst your bubble...... the Tea Party Movement is taking action to solve the problems we have with those in charge at the moment. It's a start. We are Republicans, Independents as well as Democrats and we are working together to oust those in charge of carrying out this mess we have found ourselves in. We are asking for careful consideration before spending billions we don't have. I am a hard working American making well under your estimated "average salary". Maybe I am not in the average pay range but there are so many more like myself and I resent your strong opposition when you clearly do not understand what the Tea Party movement is about. A visit to one gathering does not make you an authority. I encourage you to check out some of the websites. We are about taking this country back from those who abuse the power we gave them when we voted them into office. We do not like where this country is headed and we aim to change that.

Please refrain from lashing out at those you don't agree with. No need to insult those involved in the Tea Party Movement because in your opinion they have not come up with all the answers. Remember, you are a part of the problem as well for I see you are not listening and you like Republicans are pointing the finger and offering no solutions. The Tea Party movement is working together with all parties toward a common goal.
#32 | 1612 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
Pop_Tart wrote:
Not to burst your bubble...... the Tea Party Movement is taking action to solve the problems we have with those in charge at the moment. It's a start. We are Republicans, Independents as well as Democrats and we are working together to oust those in charge of carrying out this mess we have found ourselves in. We are asking for careful consideration before spending billions we don't have. I am a hard working American making well under your estimated "average salary". Maybe I am not in the average pay range but there are so many more like myself and I resent your strong opposition when you clearly do not understand what the Tea Party movement is about. A visit to one gathering does not make you an authority. I encourage you to check out some of the websites. We are about taking this country back from those who abuse the power we gave them when we voted them into office. We do not like where this country is headed and we aim to change that.

Please refrain from lashing out at those you don't agree with. No need to insult those involved in the Tea Party Movement because in your opinion they have not come up with all the answers. Remember, you are a part of the problem as well for I see you are not listening and you like Republicans are pointing the finger and offering no solutions. The Tea Party movement is working together with all parties toward a common goal.
Truthfully- that is one of the BEST descriptions I have seen yet and it DOES explain a little bit. However, I NEVER claimed to be the authority on the Tea Party- if you noticed- it was JUST my OPINION from what I saw and heard. Also I don't really see how it is "degrading" to those involved in the Tea Party movement IF I only ask for SOLUTIONS and less rhetoric is it?

Though your "explanation" was much more in detail than most I have heard- you also gave NO SOLUTIONS as to the method of solving these problems that you point out. And truthfully- that's all I'm after. You use the term "WE" are about taking this Country back from those who abuse the power WE gave them- yet MOST of YOUR leaders are those SAME people (I.E; Palin, Paul, and Romney)- so still I am confused.

This post was not meant as an argument- as i respect your position and your loyalty to your "Movement". And I truly respect your enlightening "description" of the Tea Party- however, as I've said numerous times " It's really easy to pump your fist and yell about what's wrong, but what are you going to do to make it right?"

BTW, you say the the Tea Party represents Republicans, as well as Independents and Democrats right? Well how come no "Democrats" are giving speeches at your rallies? How come no Democrats are your Party "leaders"? ETC ETC- All I have seen are "recycled" Republicans with make-up on- pretending to be part of something. Could you explain that to me?  Once again, I enjoyed your post and would like to hear more from you on this subject if possible.
hmmmmmmmm  
#33 | 1612 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
Pop_Tart wrote:
Not to burst your bubble...... the Tea Party Movement is taking action to solve the problems we have with those in charge at the moment. It's a start. We are Republicans, Independents as well as Democrats and we are working together to oust those in charge of carrying out this mess we have found ourselves in. We are asking for careful consideration before spending billions we don't have. I am a hard working American making well under your estimated "average salary". Maybe I am not in the average pay range but there are so many more like myself and I resent your strong opposition when you clearly do not understand what the Tea Party movement is about. A visit to one gathering does not make you an authority. I encourage you to check out some of the websites. We are about taking this country back from those who abuse the power we gave them when we voted them into office. We do not like where this country is headed and we aim to change that.

Please refrain from lashing out at those you don't agree with. No need to insult those involved in the Tea Party Movement because in your opinion they have not come up with all the answers. Remember, you are a part of the problem as well for I see you are not listening and you like Republicans are pointing the finger and offering no solutions. The Tea Party movement is working together with all parties toward a common goal.
Sorry, I forgot one other thing.....You stated that " we are working together to oust those in charge of carrying out this mess we have found ourselves in."    So are you saying that ALL current "politicians" need to be replaced by YOUR OWN "like minded" Politicians? In other words, ALL Government Officials are going to be replaced by Tea Party Members?  If that is the case- wouldn't that be called Fascism? And wasn't that tried once before in a far-away land called Germany? You do realize that only about 17% of Americans (from recent polls that I have researched) identify themselves as "possible" Tea Party members right? So that means that a whopping 83% of the American population will not be represented by ANYONE?

Once again, these are QUESTIONS- not insults at all.
hmmmmmmmm  
#34 | 1612 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Not to burst your bubble...... the Tea Party Movement is taking action to solve the problems we have with those in charge at the moment. It's a start. We are Republicans, Independents as well as Democrats and we are working together to oust those in charge of carrying out this mess we have found ourselves in. We are asking for careful consideration before spending billions we don't have. I am a hard working American making well under your estimated "average salary". Maybe I am not in the average pay range but there are so many more like myself and I resent your strong opposition when you clearly do not understand what the Tea Party movement is about. A visit to one gathering does not make you an authority. I encourage you to check out some of the websites. We are about taking this country back from those who abuse the power we gave them when we voted them into office. We do not like where this country is headed and we aim to change that.

Please refrain from lashing out at those you don't agree with. No need to insult those involved in the Tea Party Movement because in your opinion they have not come up with all the answers. Remember, you are a part of the problem as well for I see you are not listening and you like Republicans are pointing the finger and offering no solutions. The Tea Party movement is working together with all parties toward a common goal.
as I have said this kind of movement are instilling hatred to peoples mind.. maybe not all will be brainwashed but some will be, I just want to know if the members ..hate the present admin., or have they found it in their heart that it is better to cooperate than be indignant.
Now if majority of the member
could say it straight in anybody's eyes that they dont hate Obama then Tea party is doing what its suppose to do, (a vehicle for good reform)
If the leaders wont stop saying heavy things towards the incumbent.. then they have a vested interest in snatching the political power from the present admin... (could anyone explain .. why are they so passionate in discrediting the US Pres.?) I may not like Obama either because I am for Hillary but once the peoples voice has decided then people with hidden agenda could wait until its their turn to mess up.
#35 | 1611 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

(Edited by Pop_Tart)
billiePAL1998 wrote:
as I have said this kind of movement are instilling hatred to peoples mind.. maybe not all will be brainwashed but some will be, I just want to know if the members ..hate the present admin., or have they found it in their heart that it is better to cooperate than be indignant.
Now if majority of the member
could say it straight in anybody's eyes that they dont hate Obama then Tea party is doing what its suppose to do, (a vehicle for good reform)
If the leaders wont stop saying heavy things towards the incumbent.. then they have a vested interest in snatching the political power from the present admin... (could anyone explain .. why are they so passionate in discrediting the US Pres.?) I may not like Obama either because I am for Hillary but once the peoples voice has decided then people with hidden agenda could wait until its their turn to mess up.
Where did all that come from? Was it something I said?
#36 | 1611 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Do I have a bullseye on my butt or something?
#37 | 1611 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Do I have a bullseye on my butt or something?
 sorry Pop_Tart- I am just getting my idea across ....for people to realize that no matter how we despise the Govt. ...still WE should be cooperative to it, in the first place all are for the welfare of the land.
#38 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Lol, I understand. I really do. It appears people are just off the mark over this Tea Party thing. We simply want to vote out those who we feel are taking us down the wrong path. Our only weapon is our voice and our vote. That is our revolution. We are looking for solutions and new ideas, just like everyone else. We are not about violence we are about examining those we'll have to vote on in November. We do not endorse any party so jumping on the band wagon to get elected can put a bulls eye on their butt as well. The last Rally was about tax reform. The FairTax could be a solution.

The media has presented the public with their own point of view. They have intentionally misrepresented The Tea Party Movement. They pick the dumbest person out of the crowd to speak and then splash it across the news  to humiliate us. It was was not an accurate or fair assessment of who we are. The media is shameless. They have no regard for the truth and they work overtime to discredit The Tea Party Movement.

As for Vindog's question on Fascism I think you already know the answer to that. I HAVE heard of Germany and I DO KNOW what happen. I feel like you're baiting me. This is not a bloody movement to overthrow the Government. Absolutely no hard feelings Vindog and no offense was taken.

YOU billiePAL just won yourself a top spot on my respect list. Thanks for coming back to explain your passion. There are some people involved in the Tea Party Movement with the same kind of passion. I hope this brings us all to a better understanding.
#39 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

vindog wrote:
Sorry, I forgot one other thing.....You stated that " we are working together to oust those in charge of carrying out this mess we have found ourselves in."    So are you saying that ALL current "politicians" need to be replaced by YOUR OWN "like minded" Politicians? In other words, ALL Government Officials are going to be replaced by Tea Party Members?  If that is the case- wouldn't that be called Fascism? And wasn't that tried once before in a far-away land called Germany? You do realize that only about 17% of Americans (from recent polls that I have researched) identify themselves as "possible" Tea Party members right? So that means that a whopping 83% of the American population will not be represented by ANYONE?

Once again, these are QUESTIONS- not insults at all.
None taken. Just remember I tend to get a little rattled and sometimes I don't explain myself very well. The comment about ousting those in charge of this mess was not about getting rid of everyone. It's not about who is to blame. It's about getting rid of those who don't work together, those who bicker back and forth and accomplish nothing. This country doesn't have time for that. We need serious thought and  action, in that order............ not the other way around. We do have a common goal.
#40 | 1610 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
None taken. Just remember I tend to get a little rattled and sometimes I don't explain myself very well. The comment about ousting those in charge of this mess was not about getting rid of everyone. It's not about who is to blame. It's about getting rid of those who don't work together, those who bicker back and forth and accomplish nothing. This country doesn't have time for that. We need serious thought and  action, in that order............ not the other way around. We do have a common goal.
Well said.   Our debt has to be payed.  Big cuts are going to have to be suffered by everyone but our freedom and country is worth the struggle that will ensue.  It is time for this generation to pay for the debt it has cause, not our grandchildren or great grandchildren.  It is time for honorable men and women to step up.  There are no more free lunches (they never were free to begin with, somebody is paying for it).
errrrrr  
#41 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

thanks, I really needed that.
#42 | 1610 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
Pop_Tart wrote:
None taken. Just remember I tend to get a little rattled and sometimes I don't explain myself very well. The comment about ousting those in charge of this mess was not about getting rid of everyone. It's not about who is to blame. It's about getting rid of those who don't work together, those who bicker back and forth and accomplish nothing. This country doesn't have time for that. We need serious thought and  action, in that order............ not the other way around. We do have a common goal.
Good explaination and thank you . However I do have one other question based upon what you said and that was "  It's about getting rid of those who don't work together, those who bicker back and forth and accomplish nothing."    You do realize that those whom you've just described is EVERYONE with an (R) beside their name in the House and Senate right? And mostly ALL with a (D) beside their name from the previous Administration.? In other words- the opposing "Party" from every Administration fit your description perfectly as they always oppose everything the current Administration (at the time) puts on the table. The "opposing side" ALWAYS bickers and refuses to work together and NOTHING ever gets done- in this case, and in this Administration those people ARE the Republicans without a doubt!  Just a thought

One other thing, and this is hypothetical, IF (and I mean IF) there were Tea Party Members in the House and Senate RIGHT NOW (instead of Republicans)- would THEY be working with the Democrats without all the bickering back and forth and getting things done? I ask this because it is very CLEAR that the Tea Party opposes EVERYTHING that this current President does and EVERYTHING that is passed by Congress- so how would this change be of any difference that what we have currently?
hmmmmmmmm  
#43 | 1610 days ago
vindog (+)

Pop_Tart:  I'm sorry, I forgot one last point I was going to make, and please don't take this the wrong way but you said  "The media has presented the public with their own point of view. They have intentionally misrepresented The Tea Party Movement. They pick the dumbest person out of the crowd to speak and then splash it across the news  to humiliate us. It was was not an accurate or fair assessment of who we are. The media is shameless. They have no regard for the truth and they work overtime to discredit The Tea Party Movement."

I have to strongly disagree with that- the MEDIA did not choose SARAH PALIN as your voice- the Tea Party Movement did. And the vast majority of Americans don't view Sarah Palin favorably at all. The vast majority of Americans think she is very politically ignorant and is ONLY serving her OWN purpose about making money right now- so if she continues to be the face of the "movement"- the "discrediting" of the Tea Party WILL continue. To win over the majority of the American population- the Tea Party MUST get rid of Sarah Palin or it is sunk! In fact, a huge amount of Americans feel that John McCain ONLY lost the election because of his choice of Palin as his running mate. She may be "liked" in the circles of the Tea Party movement- but she is literally despised by everyone else.

Once again, this isn't an insult- just the truth from someone who sees things from the "other side". The Tea Party NEEDS better leaders for it to accomplish anything at this point......
hmmmmmmmm  
#44 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

(Edited by Pop_Tart)
Pop_Tart wrote:
None taken. Just remember I tend to get a little rattled and sometimes I don't explain myself very well. The comment about ousting those in charge of this mess was not about getting rid of everyone. It's not about who is to blame. It's about getting rid of those who don't work together, those who bicker back and forth and accomplish nothing. This country doesn't have time for that. We need serious thought and  action, in that order............ not the other way around. We do have a common goal.
Lol, Don't you ever run out of questions? Cause I'm running out of brain power. I have more to say about your post here but I gotta have a break. And don't be thinking of anymore questions till i get back! Lol, just kidding. We'll talk again soon.
#45 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

vindog wrote:
Pop_Tart:  I'm sorry, I forgot one last point I was going to make, and please don't take this the wrong way but you said  "The media has presented the public with their own point of view. They have intentionally misrepresented The Tea Party Movement. They pick the dumbest person out of the crowd to speak and then splash it across the news  to humiliate us. It was was not an accurate or fair assessment of who we are. The media is shameless. They have no regard for the truth and they work overtime to discredit The Tea Party Movement."

I have to strongly disagree with that- the MEDIA did not choose SARAH PALIN as your voice- the Tea Party Movement did. And the vast majority of Americans don't view Sarah Palin favorably at all. The vast majority of Americans think she is very politically ignorant and is ONLY serving her OWN purpose about making money right now- so if she continues to be the face of the "movement"- the "discrediting" of the Tea Party WILL continue. To win over the majority of the American population- the Tea Party MUST get rid of Sarah Palin or it is sunk! In fact, a huge amount of Americans feel that John McCain ONLY lost the election because of his choice of Palin as his running mate. She may be "liked" in the circles of the Tea Party movement- but she is literally despised by everyone else.

Once again, this isn't an insult- just the truth from someone who sees things from the "other side". The Tea Party NEEDS better leaders for it to accomplish anything at this point......
You're not allowed to ask anymore questions.....I'm tired!
#46 | 1610 days ago
vindog (+)

Pop_Tart wrote:
You're not allowed to ask anymore questions.....I'm tired!
Fair enough...... At least I can actually have an intelligent conversation with you without all the petty little insults!  Get back to me when you have time- I'm very patient.

BTW, I actually do agree and support the idea of a flat tax as would lots of people if it was presented the right way. The problem that I see in it is that some " income group" will feel like they are getting screwed if the flat tax were implemented. Example: (Hypothetically) Lets say that they decided to implement a 25% flat tax rate on everyone. Well those who are currently paying less than that will feel like they are getting screwed and being forced to make up the taxes for those who are paying MORE than 25% and are getting a tax reduction..... Do you see my point on that one. And of course somebody will be screaming those evil words "Redistribution of Wealth" at someone else. I DO however LOVE the idea.....I'm not as "Liberal" as some on this site would love to lable me as.
hmmmmmmmm  
#47 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

vindog wrote:
Pop_Tart:  I'm sorry, I forgot one last point I was going to make, and please don't take this the wrong way but you said  "The media has presented the public with their own point of view. They have intentionally misrepresented The Tea Party Movement. They pick the dumbest person out of the crowd to speak and then splash it across the news  to humiliate us. It was was not an accurate or fair assessment of who we are. The media is shameless. They have no regard for the truth and they work overtime to discredit The Tea Party Movement."

I have to strongly disagree with that- the MEDIA did not choose SARAH PALIN as your voice- the Tea Party Movement did. And the vast majority of Americans don't view Sarah Palin favorably at all. The vast majority of Americans think she is very politically ignorant and is ONLY serving her OWN purpose about making money right now- so if she continues to be the face of the "movement"- the "discrediting" of the Tea Party WILL continue. To win over the majority of the American population- the Tea Party MUST get rid of Sarah Palin or it is sunk! In fact, a huge amount of Americans feel that John McCain ONLY lost the election because of his choice of Palin as his running mate. She may be "liked" in the circles of the Tea Party movement- but she is literally despised by everyone else.

Once again, this isn't an insult- just the truth from someone who sees things from the "other side". The Tea Party NEEDS better leaders for it to accomplish anything at this point......
On the subject of John McCain......he defeated himself. Sarah Palin? not too sure about her either. But once again I think the media played a big part in discrediting her. Hmmmm, I didn't say I was the one who chose her as a spokesman. I think right now she needs to step out of the limelight. She's a help to no one.

Now you misunderstood what I was saying on the subject of the media. I was talking about one incident. The one where they put the mic in the wrong persons face. Reporter Susan Roesgen is a pretty good example of how the media works. I'm sorry to say the video I found was on fox but it does show a film clip from a bystander in the crowd. That's what I was talking about.  Unfortunately our media has become their own voice. They don't report the news they report their own voice. That's why I like it here where I can talk to real people and learn something. I want the voice of the people.........without CNN and FOX.
#48 | 1610 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

vindog wrote:
Fair enough...... At least I can actually have an intelligent conversation with you without all the petty little insults!  Get back to me when you have time- I'm very patient.

BTW, I actually do agree and support the idea of a flat tax as would lots of people if it was presented the right way. The problem that I see in it is that some " income group" will feel like they are getting screwed if the flat tax were implemented. Example: (Hypothetically) Lets say that they decided to implement a 25% flat tax rate on everyone. Well those who are currently paying less than that will feel like they are getting screwed and being forced to make up the taxes for those who are paying MORE than 25% and are getting a tax reduction..... Do you see my point on that one. And of course somebody will be screaming those evil words "Redistribution of Wealth" at someone else. I DO however LOVE the idea.....I'm not as "Liberal" as some on this site would love to lable me as.
I think it could be a good idea but it still needs careful consideration. There are potential problems with it. Health Care Reform is the same only I feel they didn't think it through before voting it in. But that's another subject for another time. And thanks for the break!
#49 | 1610 days ago
vindog (+)

Pop_Tart wrote:
On the subject of John McCain......he defeated himself. Sarah Palin? not too sure about her either. But once again I think the media played a big part in discrediting her. Hmmmm, I didn't say I was the one who chose her as a spokesman. I think right now she needs to step out of the limelight. She's a help to no one.

Now you misunderstood what I was saying on the subject of the media. I was talking about one incident. The one where they put the mic in the wrong persons face. Reporter Susan Roesgen is a pretty good example of how the media works. I'm sorry to say the video I found was on fox but it does show a film clip from a bystander in the crowd. That's what I was talking about.  Unfortunately our media has become their own voice. They don't report the news they report their own voice. That's why I like it here where I can talk to real people and learn something. I want the voice of the people.........without CNN and FOX.
I completely agree with what you just said. The media DOES exploit it's own views on BOTH sides of the fence- there is really no media outlet that is "fair and balanced" at all.  As far as the "voice of the people"- that's what I was expressing when I described MY EXPERIENCE with the "Tea Party" that I attended. I never said everyone was like that- but the MAJORITY of the crowd (reportedly 2500-4000 people) were exactly as I described and the "voice of Palin" was very prevalent throughout the crowd.

The Rally that I attended was simply a rally to BASH the President and the Democrats- while NOTHING derogatory was said about Republicans at all- so I guess that's WHY my opinion of the Tea Party is what it is now. You only "covet" what you see and what I SAW were a bunch of angry people pumping their fists and screaming about President Obama and how he is a Socialist and is destroying the Country- which in my own opinion is very far from the truth. I don't agree with a lot of his policies, but in no way do I think he has the intent of destroying this Nation either and he IS VERY intelligent and understands the problems that this Country faces. Maybe he isn't going about "problem solving" in a way that some would agree with- but he IS doing something at least to try and fix the problems. I also heard A LOT of racist comments (at the rally) about the Presidents skin color- so I guess I'm saying- what am I supposed to think?

It's very pleasant to talk to someone such as yourself (on the other side so to speak) that isn't as "radical" as the Tea Party members that I encountered.
hmmmmmmmm  
#50 | 1610 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
I though I WAS addressing Pop_Tart..... At least that's who I thought I was responding to.  BTW- like I said- this was MY EXPERIENCE at the Tea Party that I attended- as far as "other places" maybe they are different- I don't know, I can only base my OPINION off of what I encounter in my personal life. And actually- I have seen some of the same "rhetoric" that I experienced in Las Vegas on T.V. (which obviously isn't always factual), on the Internet, and in newspapers in ALL different parts of this Country- so to say "it must be a Western thing" is NOT factual either- it has happened everywhere- as there are RADICALS in every part of this Country.
Not saying that every Tea Party member is a radical of course, but there ARE most definitely some radicals in the movement itself- as there are radicals in every "new movement." Nobody likes to be defined by the foolish acts of the few, and there are always bad apples in the bunch- but sadly in America today- that's how we ARE defined. There is no more " shades of gray" in this Country- only black and white and EVERYONE is "labeled" as being one of these or one of those. Unfortunately (for the Tea Party)- those few acts ( I.e; those videos of the Congressmen being spit on and racial slurs being hurled at them as they were walking into Congress) were branded into the minds of EVERY American who saw them- and those images (as it stands now) are the ONLY ones that people are going to remember when push comes to shove. I know it's unfair to "label" every Tea Party member as such- but that is the World that we live in today.
hmmmmmmmm  
#51 | 1610 days ago

vindog wrote:
Ummm just to be FACTUAL here as far as President Reagan is concerned and how " due to those cuts in taxes, America enjoyed a tremendous period of financial growth"-   President Reagan (because of those tax cuts) RAISED our National Debt by 20.6 % in 8 years and President Bush II (and his tax cuts) RAISED our National Debt by 27% in 8 years. Funny how "Conservatives" clearly FORGET to point out what actually happened to this Country as a result of those enormous tax cuts......

(Source: Whitehouse FY 2011 Budget - Table 7.1 Federal Debt at the End of Year PDF, Excel)

Now compare the National Debt to President Clinton (who was sandwiched in between those two Presidents) and you will see that in his 8 years in office the National Debt DECREASED by 9.7% and yet he did NOT lower taxes, but he DID cut Government spending somewhat. As I've said NUMEROUS TIMES- cutting taxes is not always the best solution to the problem. Yet cutting taxes IS what "Conservatives" THINK is ALWAYS the solution.
good points.  before reagan, carter. home loans at 20+ %.  double digit inflation every year. wage and price freezes.  hostages in iran.  having a hissy fit and boycotting the olympics.  etc, etc, etc, and a bonehead brother named billy.
#52 | 1610 days ago
vindog (+)

WISAC1 wrote:
good points.  before reagan, carter. home loans at 20+ %.  double digit inflation every year. wage and price freezes.  hostages in iran.  having a hissy fit and boycotting the olympics.  etc, etc, etc, and a bonehead brother named billy.
Those are good points too. All I was saying is that "some people" love to put President Reagan on this "Financial Pedestal" and speak of him as if he was the savior of the American economy- when FACTUALLY that is completely UNTRUE! He left office with a MUCH HIGHER National deficit than he started with which put this Country in a huge hole with NO WAY to dig out of it without raising taxes and cutting valuable Government Programs. Basically the same thing that Bush left this Country with as well. You can't pay off a debt IF you are making LESS money to actually pay it off and the Fed was charging the Government INTEREST on the money borrowed as well. Which really baffles me how the Federal Reserve can charge interest to the Federal Government>>>
hmmmmmmmm  
#53 | 1608 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

vindog wrote:
Good explaination and thank you . However I do have one other question based upon what you said and that was "  It's about getting rid of those who don't work together, those who bicker back and forth and accomplish nothing."    You do realize that those whom you've just described is EVERYONE with an (R) beside their name in the House and Senate right? And mostly ALL with a (D) beside their name from the previous Administration.? In other words- the opposing "Party" from every Administration fit your description perfectly as they always oppose everything the current Administration (at the time) puts on the table. The "opposing side" ALWAYS bickers and refuses to work together and NOTHING ever gets done- in this case, and in this Administration those people ARE the Republicans without a doubt!  Just a thought

One other thing, and this is hypothetical, IF (and I mean IF) there were Tea Party Members in the House and Senate RIGHT NOW (instead of Republicans)- would THEY be working with the Democrats without all the bickering back and forth and getting things done? I ask this because it is very CLEAR that the Tea Party opposes EVERYTHING that this current President does and EVERYTHING that is passed by Congress- so how would this change be of any difference that what we have currently?
Congress doesn't work toward solutions, they plot revenge. America doesn't need those kinds of representatives.  If I am one voice I have to speak a little louder for the majority to hear me. If I'm screaming, yelling, and pounding my fist  the majority will brand me a radical and turn a blind eye. I think in the beginning it might have been a mistake for the Tea Party group to show that kind of behavior but maybe it was necessary in order to get attention. If you look back in history it seems to repeating itself. I don't see The Tea Party headed for a bloody revolution. But remember, our only weapon is our voice and our vote. The American Revolution started because the Colonist felt their rights had been trampled upon by the British. It was a radical group who called themselves "The Sons of Liberty" that probably started with a small voice, brushed off by Parliament because Parliament thought they had too much power to be brought down. Look what happened when those in charged thought they didn't have to listen. The Tea Party Movement today may only be 17% of the population as you pointed out but that is no reason to give up. It's 2010 and after all this time you'd think Americans would be a little more intelligent about how we go about things. That we'd have learned from our mistakes but we haven't. If we keep moving forward with little thought about the long term consequences we aren't going to accomplish anything, we'll probably end up in a worse situation than we're in now. That's what The Tea Party Movement wants people to hear. Remember your history. We want Congress to THINK. As I said before, we need serious thought and action, in that order and not the other way around.

The Tea Party IS out to change SOME things. But today we know we need to go about it in a different way. There's nothing to fear from this small voice.  83% of the population has been convinced That The Tea Party Movement is a bunch of radical idiots by a much smaller group called the Media.

Sorry it took me so long to get back to you Vindog. If any facts are out of order feel free to set me straight. This whole conversation we've had has been a learning experience for the both of us I hope. Lol! Now I know your gonna bombard me with questions.....one at a time please. With you I gotta stay on my toes.
#54 | 1608 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
Pop_Tart wrote:
Congress doesn't work toward solutions, they plot revenge. America doesn't need those kinds of representatives.  If I am one voice I have to speak a little louder for the majority to hear me. If I'm screaming, yelling, and pounding my fist  the majority will brand me a radical and turn a blind eye. I think in the beginning it might have been a mistake for the Tea Party group to show that kind of behavior but maybe it was necessary in order to get attention. If you look back in history it seems to repeating itself. I don't see The Tea Party headed for a bloody revolution. But remember, our only weapon is our voice and our vote. The American Revolution started because the Colonist felt their rights had been trampled upon by the British. It was a radical group who called themselves "The Sons of Liberty" that probably started with a small voice, brushed off by Parliament because Parliament thought they had too much power to be brought down. Look what happened when those in charged thought they didn't have to listen. The Tea Party Movement today may only be 17% of the population as you pointed out but that is no reason to give up. It's 2010 and after all this time you'd think Americans would be a little more intelligent about how we go about things. That we'd have learned from our mistakes but we haven't. If we keep moving forward with little thought about the long term consequences we aren't going to accomplish anything, we'll probably end up in a worse situation than we're in now. That's what The Tea Party Movement wants people to hear. Remember your history. We want Congress to THINK. As I said before, we need serious thought and action, in that order and not the other way around.

The Tea Party IS out to change SOME things. But today we know we need to go about it in a different way. There's nothing to fear from this small voice.  83% of the population has been convinced That The Tea Party Movement is a bunch of radical idiots by a much smaller group called the Media.

Sorry it took me so long to get back to you Vindog. If any facts are out of order feel free to set me straight. This whole conversation we've had has been a learning experience for the both of us I hope. Lol! Now I know your gonna bombard me with questions.....one at a time please. With you I gotta stay on my toes.
Once again another great explanation and well written.  I DO understand the "ideas" behind the movement- hell everybody is pissed about the Government overspending on pork projects and things of that nature- and everyone is PISSED about Corporate GREED and Corporate Welfare which comes with Lobbyists as well. However- I guess the reason WHY "83% of Americans" are skeptical of the Tea Party movement is like I said before- the Tea Party LEADERS themselves and the "back- biting" by such "LEADERS" who are fighting amongst themselves to prove that THEY are MORE "Tea- Partyish" (for lack of a better term) than the "other guy". I have watched this unfold right here in Nevada for the 2010 Senatorial Race for the Republican primary and the chance to take on Harry Reid in the primary. We have 3 candidates who ALL claim that they are from the Tea Party ( Danny Tarkanian, Sue Lowden, and Sharron Angle) and are literally tearing each other to shreds to get the "Tea Party" vote- it's quite humorous in fact. What they are failing to realize is that they are acting JUST LIKE every other politician and right now (because of their political antics)- Sen Harry Reid leads ALL 3 of them in EVERY poll head to head with each Candidate (and this is a Republican State- lol) . The reason is obvious.....He is winning by default because the Tea Party (at least here in Nevada) has NO PLATFORM, NO leadership, NO guidance, and NO new ideas- all they do it bitch about the current Government- in other words- same old thing.....

I hope you understand what I was trying to convey with all of that stuff about my home State- but it IS happening everywhere in this Country. Tea Party members trying to prove they are MORE of a Tea Partier than the next guy- which in turn creates a "politics as usual" atmosphere and conveys NO NEW MESSAGE to the American people. Are these Tea Party "Candidates" the ones we want to send to Washington? Candidates that would rather tear each other to bits in a Primary election instead of trying to get across a REAL message?
hmmmmmmmm  
#55 | 1608 days ago

I live in cook county ,Il .  We pay a 10.5 sales tax , .85 tax on a gallon of gas and oh yea .05 tax on bottled watewr.  not to mention a 100- 250 % tax hike ..
 I hate to see good tea go to waste , but a few politicians made to walk the plamk is not a bad idea .
hmmmmmmmm  
#56 | 1608 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

bigbueh64 wrote:
I live in cook county ,Il .  We pay a 10.5 sales tax , .85 tax on a gallon of gas and oh yea .05 tax on bottled watewr.  not to mention a 100- 250 % tax hike ..
 I hate to see good tea go to waste , but a few politicians made to walk the plamk is not a bad idea .
Good one!
#57 | 1608 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

vindog wrote:
Once again another great explanation and well written.  I DO understand the "ideas" behind the movement- hell everybody is pissed about the Government overspending on pork projects and things of that nature- and everyone is PISSED about Corporate GREED and Corporate Welfare which comes with Lobbyists as well. However- I guess the reason WHY "83% of Americans" are skeptical of the Tea Party movement is like I said before- the Tea Party LEADERS themselves and the "back- biting" by such "LEADERS" who are fighting amongst themselves to prove that THEY are MORE "Tea- Partyish" (for lack of a better term) than the "other guy". I have watched this unfold right here in Nevada for the 2010 Senatorial Race for the Republican primary and the chance to take on Harry Reid in the primary. We have 3 candidates who ALL claim that they are from the Tea Party ( Danny Tarkanian, Sue Lowden, and Sharron Angle) and are literally tearing each other to shreds to get the "Tea Party" vote- it's quite humorous in fact. What they are failing to realize is that they are acting JUST LIKE every other politician and right now (because of their political antics)- Sen Harry Reid leads ALL 3 of them in EVERY poll head to head with each Candidate (and this is a Republican State- lol) . The reason is obvious.....He is winning by default because the Tea Party (at least here in Nevada) has NO PLATFORM, NO leadership, NO guidance, and NO new ideas- all they do it bitch about the current Government- in other words- same old thing.....

I hope you understand what I was trying to convey with all of that stuff about my home State- but it IS happening everywhere in this Country. Tea Party members trying to prove they are MORE of a Tea Partier than the next guy- which in turn creates a "politics as usual" atmosphere and conveys NO NEW MESSAGE to the American people. Are these Tea Party "Candidates" the ones we want to send to Washington? Candidates that would rather tear each other to bits in a Primary election instead of trying to get across a REAL message?
What can I say........politicians can be so stupid! I'll be glad to pass that bullseye I had on my butt to theirs. I'd be the first in line to throw the dart. However, since I don't have good aim I'd like at least three darts!
#58 | 1607 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Pop_Tart wrote:
What can I say........politicians can be so stupid! I'll be glad to pass that bullseye I had on my butt to theirs. I'd be the first in line to throw the dart. However, since I don't have good aim I'd like at least three darts!
Ah, something we can agree on!
#59 | 1604 days ago

Jess wrote:
All posts that were personal insults or attacks toward other users have been removed. Please remember the Code of Conduct, folks. Personal attacks are not tolerated on FanIQ and can lead to account removal. It's understandable that political polls get heated, but people can have civil passionate debates and disagree with people without having to lash out and make it personal. Please be more careful.
the tea party , is new group .. that is very far to the right... Republicans on stairiods... more extreme .....those tht like to bitch because they can ... welcome to the 21st century...

#60 | 1602 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

senormcslim wrote:
the tea party , is new group .. that is very far to the right... Republicans on stairiods... more extreme .....those tht like to bitch because they can ... welcome to the 21st century...

Uh oh, I see the bullseye has come back, on steroids!
#61 | 1602 days ago
bcchop (+)

I try and not be negitave but it is time for a change. has anyone ever sat down and added all the tax's togather that we pay?? sales tax personell property,income,social security (which won't last much longer) schooltax.. i hate to put pencil to it .. like the song seys "it adds up to more than this ol boy makes".... i welcome the tea party just hope it doesn't get lost in the process...
#62 | 1602 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Basically, the Tea Party movement is an activist element of the Republican Party.  Initially, they were louting their diversity inviting all political philosophies, but in a short time, this has evolved into a more conservative element than the conservative mainstream politicians.  There can be no legitimate argument as to the difference in policy perspectives between the two entities; the only real difference is that the things being said at these rallies are sentiments that can not be said openly by politicians that want to maintain 'plausable deniability' to to maintain the fence voters.

As for the essence of "bloody revolution", I seriously doubt that would happen except (perhaps) with small radical bubble groups.  As it is a side element (oft times associatively included) in my research.  The number of "patriot groups" have nearly tripled since the election of President Obama; there are now around 550 known patriot groups (if you want more accurate figures, I can dig them out--I'm going from memory at the moment).

If the country ever reached a point of a revolutionary change, it would be in the fracture of a republic to that of an economic federalism (ironically, it is a federalist form of government that they post revolutionary peoples desired).  If something like this occurred, it would take a form similar to the European Union, whereas regions took control of their own socio-economic geographic areas, with the central government representing each region in international matters, but leaving the control of their individual regions to newly established government bodies.  Hence, America could (for example), have 9 federalist states with very different social and economic structures depending upon the values of the geographical population.

Then again, this is all speculation from a field of political science called "futuristic studies", whereas deductive reasoning is applied to reason (or guess...LOL) potential evolutionary outcomes to various political situations.  It's sometimes interesting to take all the information one knows and apply it to such scenarios, but again deductive reasoning / speculation is what it is until it occurs.

There is one region that is more prone to "bloody revolution" than are others, but that is another post...
#63 | 1600 days ago

Just to clear up a very common misconception...  The Boston Tea Party did not have much to do with "Taxation without representation".  It was mostly a reaction to yet another tax that was being imposed on the American Colonies.  In this case, the Tea Tax.  The cry of "taxation without representation" was mostly just a rallying slogan to get people into the cause.  In fact, the last thing the Founding Fathers wanted was representation in Parliament.  Such a thing would only curtail their goal of detaching from the British Empire.
#64 | 1590 days ago

vantiffin52 wrote:
Guess you'll have to delete Vindog then, since all he does is attack personally!  And if CONSTANTLY running down this country and attacking Repulicans is a banning offense, then delete him!
there is a difference o speaking passionately to make a point,hun......than attacking personally....if we try and be objective when we read ,we can see the difference..it is hard,,,but iam the same way..very passionate,but objective.....i believe that is what vin tries to do as well
#65 | 1575 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Uh oh, I see the bullseye has come back, on steroids!
it was not the steroids but the extreme behavior, the topic was the TEA Party movement.. just knowing the cause and effect for the actions and what can happen because of those choices.. steroids used to help an injury vs. to pump up to an unreal size an the side effects... extreme right or extreme left i know not everyone fits into the status quo.. but yeah it was an ez target but ez for the masses to understand
#66 | 1571 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

senormcslim wrote:
the tea party , is new group .. that is very far to the right... Republicans on stairiods... more extreme .....those tht like to bitch because they can ... welcome to the 21st century...

 Everyone bitches and moans today. You are no exception.
#67 | 1570 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

senormcslim wrote:
it was not the steroids but the extreme behavior, the topic was the TEA Party movement.. just knowing the cause and effect for the actions and what can happen because of those choices.. steroids used to help an injury vs. to pump up to an unreal size an the side effects... extreme right or extreme left i know not everyone fits into the status quo.. but yeah it was an ez target but ez for the masses to understand
So what exactly are you saying?
#68 | 1567 days ago

The Obama admin. is now looking for ways to fine the origanal tea poarty group for contaminating boston harbor .
hmmmmmmmm  
#69 | 1567 days ago

bigbueh64 wrote:
The Obama admin. is now looking for ways to fine the origanal tea poarty group for contaminating boston harbor .
 Is that supposed to be a joke in defense of BP?

*sighs* 
#70 | 1567 days ago

kantwistaye wrote:
 Is that supposed to be a joke in defense of BP?

*sighs* 
no nothing about BP. More along the lines of our crrent administration and some of there faux paus
hmmmmmmmm  
#71 | 1567 days ago

IMHO...BOTH parties have gotten so far away from their roots i find it all a huge cluster F**K....... Remember when JFK was considered  so liberal? Yet in today's society he would be considered a right wing moderate.... Everyone thought Regan was the 2nd coming but he is who started the wheels of NAFTA going, which in essence has started the decline of the american dollar by harvesting out our jobs over seas to the lowest  bidder.. BOTH  branches of governments represent the nworst in America opposed to the BESt, in which it should be representing......We have all experienced what deregulation has done in the past 20 something years, especially of late.   Bank monoploys desagrating the middle class,oil companies lying and causing natural disasters and ruining our eco systems and homes and food chains, lies and deceptions by coorperations for the sake of a buck, with no regard to you or I.  enron, milikens, white water, the list goes on and both sides are liable.
    I ask you this? do we want  big business making our decisions for us?.Governing is for the sake of ALL people..and no matter ho much we agree or disagree on it..We need to be Governed. there has to be common ground and laws to abide.
   We all agree that laws should be upheld..yes? So why should our Government be different?( meaning they needs laws to run it) We are running a country here..and millions of people's lives and livlihoods are on the line here.
    Both parties are representing their own special interests.....We sincerely need a 3rd party,however a True 3rd party..Not a party that is an extension of existing parties. I have been a registered republican sinc ei was of voting age.......I have worked on presidential campaigns, senate campaigns....and i tell you people......IF we do not start making informed decisions and READ the facts, NOT listen to our news,and media, but ACTUALLY do research ourselves, we will lose the core of what everyone of us as AMERICANS want.
       We are only shuffeling blame here  people! We have different "parties" doing the exact same things(dependng on which party affiliation you agree with or disagree with) its the same ol thing different day..... We can continie to vote 8 years of republican and 4 years of democrat and stay on the same course..or we can read,make decisions based on facts, NOT hype....or we can be part of the problem........This will be an historical election in November (maybe more so than Obama being elected)..I urge each and every one of you to read the healthcare reform bill,and se ewhat is truly in it. I think you may be surprised to see wha tit actually contains.
   Having voted ,party lines (mostly) in the past..I now vote for the person.....We have come to the lesser of evils in our vote because We the People are not truly represented. We all want low(er) taxes, privacy, and freedom......However in a "Free society" we have a responcibility to our country, and those freedoms..and they DO NOT come without a price(taxes, human life et al)
   Whgat gets me, is no one wanted health reform  in the republican party", however when you ask  people if they want their social security and medicare or private county/ state veteran insurances,we all say yes!.......Who run those services folks? Our Government. Does it mean if we pay into them and accept them we are for socialized medicine? Of cours eNot.   They are government ran entities....And that was exactly what Obama wanted for ALL OF YOU..... it isnt socialized medicine  its a fair and balanced health care..Unfortunately, it wasnt passed and big business will continue to run out health care,though our seniors who are on social security/medicare and our poor will see more of a balane in their out of pocket expenses eventually, hospitals wont make the profits they are used to,,adminitrators will have to take cuts in pay and be accountable for their establishments now..(a good thing to me)......but belive me....Wha tObama tried to pass, would have been the most comprehensive ,fair health care for all of us.....We hear socialized..and we all squirm......That isnt anywhere what Obama suggested in the health reform bill..But you must read it...We all must take responcibility for our future and freedoms.....Make informed decisions based on FACTS, Not SCARe tactics and Proproganda..... (I am not crazy of the health reform passed becaus eit allows too much power still for the insurance industry,thus stocks went up after the passing)
   An interesting fact......Obama and the medicare fraud task forces have in 18 months saved america billions of dollars in medicare schemes& frauds...that went un dectected for many years........the money spent vs the money saved has out weighed the benefits by an infinite margain..If this is a bad thing,,let me know.....It could be in a large part why medicare /social security will be saved..for you receiving it........But we dont hear about that......we dont hear about the 30 other lives lost between 2006 and 2010 on oil rigs and how the il companies paid less than 75,000 dollars in fines,,becuase the paper trail was buried so deeply even our own government had a hard time finding out the truths, ....Becaus ethere is stature of limitations on law suits..thos epeople who lost their lives , had no proof of wrongful deaths...and had no suit......I find that disturbing and extremely sad........Have we become a society where human life has no value, becaus ethe  elite in big business can lieand schemeand deceive ? pharmacuticl companies, oil companies are ripping us off left nd right by not paying their tax share....get mad at them for the cost of your taxes going up...  Goldman Schachs paid a 550 million dollar fine for their un ethical business practices......(one of the largest in history),,yet in reality its only 2 days profits for them..yet millions of people lost everything...it took 10 years to even fine them!......This is where fair and balanced needs to come on to play.......PLEASE PEOPLE...All i ask is tha tyou READ the FACTSon aLL ISSUES and learn the truth before you cast your votes, no matter what your party affilliation.....Lets become the solution.by being informed AMERICANS....not followers in the same trends of the past decades.....We can be the difference!
#72 | 1567 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

WOW.......  
#73 | 1567 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
WOW.......  
thakyou sir norse.....! thanks for actually reading it and getting it.....it is non partisant and i believe is a dose of what we all need to hear.........we can continue to make the same choices or be the difference......it just takes a lil effort:)
#74 | 1565 days ago

I know one or two people here who would have serious issues with placing blame on everyone! 
#75 | 1565 days ago

senormcslim wrote:
it was not the steroids but the extreme behavior, the topic was the TEA Party movement.. just knowing the cause and effect for the actions and what can happen because of those choices.. steroids used to help an injury vs. to pump up to an unreal size an the side effects... extreme right or extreme left i know not everyone fits into the status quo.. but yeah it was an ez target but ez for the masses to understand
the ideas of freedom and the desire to live a life that brings happiness, thisdreamlives in most of all of us.. but it has been lost in those that have grown to be families of politics .. those that for years have played the game of taking monies from lobbists, vote with the party when it is EZ and to look the other way when the hard tuff views are looking them in the face...
what ever happened with doing the right thing... the good of OUR PEOPLE...when did being popular become more important than being right... we are a nation of many...yet we allow the select few run tis nation that i would think most of us see can not continue... millions of dollars given to states to create but a hand full of jobs, so who got the money,,because the little guy did not ... STOP and LOOK around you... see the game being played and have the WILL to stand and point out the errors of the government ... bridges to no-where, $20,000. street signs, look at the money given to Haiti ..if each adult living in Haiti was given an equal percentage of the money for AID ..each would have been given over $100,000 to restart their lives... yet most are still homeless, still living in poverty.. so like i had said ..where did the money go..big business ..corp. exec. , the little guy did not see it.. but some walked with a big stash of cash.. the 2 party system is failing the people...extrme, moral majority, libral, whatever... this world is in need of HELP... we all need to start looking out for each other and not just ourselves
#76 | 1565 days ago

senormcslim wrote:
the ideas of freedom and the desire to live a life that brings happiness, thisdreamlives in most of all of us.. but it has been lost in those that have grown to be families of politics .. those that for years have played the game of taking monies from lobbists, vote with the party when it is EZ and to look the other way when the hard tuff views are looking them in the face...
what ever happened with doing the right thing... the good of OUR PEOPLE...when did being popular become more important than being right... we are a nation of many...yet we allow the select few run tis nation that i would think most of us see can not continue... millions of dollars given to states to create but a hand full of jobs, so who got the money,,because the little guy did not ... STOP and LOOK around you... see the game being played and have the WILL to stand and point out the errors of the government ... bridges to no-where, $20,000. street signs, look at the money given to Haiti ..if each adult living in Haiti was given an equal percentage of the money for AID ..each would have been given over $100,000 to restart their lives... yet most are still homeless, still living in poverty.. so like i had said ..where did the money go..big business ..corp. exec. , the little guy did not see it.. but some walked with a big stash of cash.. the 2 party system is failing the people...extrme, moral majority, libral, whatever... this world is in need of HELP... we all need to start looking out for each other and not just ourselves
we have to start being a NO nation to others un deserving....our current president is trying to help the "little guy"..but he keeps getting no votes and fillabusters..he can not pass things to help IF the 2 main parties do not work together...That is the problem with a 2 party system.....its the same problem different day. i agree we do need to start putting all americans first....thus the point of my statement..we the people need to really think about our choices..not just party lines..we need to read the issues how our represenatives are voting and hold them accountable...how many times have you called and or wrote your elected officials? do you get answeres? we are lucky in nevada our sentaor is cooperative and has done alot for our state,,,exept when he gets voted down..but tha tisnt his fault.....things wont change until we insist on non partisant politics ,which will represent all people..not a few....good post...
#77 | 1565 days ago

senormcslim wrote:
the ideas of freedom and the desire to live a life that brings happiness, thisdreamlives in most of all of us.. but it has been lost in those that have grown to be families of politics .. those that for years have played the game of taking monies from lobbists, vote with the party when it is EZ and to look the other way when the hard tuff views are looking them in the face...
what ever happened with doing the right thing... the good of OUR PEOPLE...when did being popular become more important than being right... we are a nation of many...yet we allow the select few run tis nation that i would think most of us see can not continue... millions of dollars given to states to create but a hand full of jobs, so who got the money,,because the little guy did not ... STOP and LOOK around you... see the game being played and have the WILL to stand and point out the errors of the government ... bridges to no-where, $20,000. street signs, look at the money given to Haiti ..if each adult living in Haiti was given an equal percentage of the money for AID ..each would have been given over $100,000 to restart their lives... yet most are still homeless, still living in poverty.. so like i had said ..where did the money go..big business ..corp. exec. , the little guy did not see it.. but some walked with a big stash of cash.. the 2 party system is failing the people...extrme, moral majority, libral, whatever... this world is in need of HELP... we all need to start looking out for each other and not just ourselves
we have to start being a NO nation to others un deserving....our current president is trying to help the "little guy"..but he keeps getting no votes and fillabusters..he can not pass things to help IF the 2 main parties do not work together...That is the problem with a 2 party system.....its the same problem different day. i agree we do need to start putting all americans first....thus the point of my statement..we the people need to really think about our choices..not just party lines..we need to read the issues how our represenatives are voting and hold them accountable...how many times have you called and or wrote your elected officials? do you get answeres? we are lucky in nevada our sentaor is cooperative and has done alot for our state,,,exept when he gets voted down..but tha tisnt his fault.....things wont change until we insist on non partisant politics ,which will represent all people..not a few....good post...
#78 | 1565 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
we have to start being a NO nation to others un deserving....our current president is trying to help the "little guy"..but he keeps getting no votes and fillabusters..he can not pass things to help IF the 2 main parties do not work together...That is the problem with a 2 party system.....its the same problem different day. i agree we do need to start putting all americans first....thus the point of my statement..we the people need to really think about our choices..not just party lines..we need to read the issues how our represenatives are voting and hold them accountable...how many times have you called and or wrote your elected officials? do you get answeres? we are lucky in nevada our sentaor is cooperative and has done alot for our state,,,exept when he gets voted down..but tha tisnt his fault.....things wont change until we insist on non partisant politics ,which will represent all people..not a few....good post...
our current president is trying to help the "little guy"..but he keeps getting no votes and fillabusters..

This right there shows a partisan attitude.  From another point of view, our current President is trying something that will ruin the economy and therefore deserves to get "no votes and fillabusters".  Perhaps it is seen as so very bad that even watered down and compromised versions would be detrimental to this nation.

There are a lot of things the 2 party system brings that I do not care for, but one thing it does tend to do is keep the other side in check.  A solid 3rd party might be interesting, but am not sure what exactly that might bring to our political system.  It might qualify as a "be careful what you wish for" kind of thing...
#79 | 1563 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

I'm actually enjoying reading all this. Nice posts ML31, Onegoodredhead2 and senormcslim. If we could just get all Americans to think and politicians to listen. THAT would be an awesome!
#80 | 1563 days ago

ML31 wrote:
our current president is trying to help the "little guy"..but he keeps getting no votes and fillabusters..

This right there shows a partisan attitude.  From another point of view, our current President is trying something that will ruin the economy and therefore deserves to get "no votes and fillabusters".  Perhaps it is seen as so very bad that even watered down and compromised versions would be detrimental to this nation.

There are a lot of things the 2 party system brings that I do not care for, but one thing it does tend to do is keep the other side in check.  A solid 3rd party might be interesting, but am not sure what exactly that might bring to our political system.  It might qualify as a "be careful what you wish for" kind of thing...
if you actually read the whole comment instead of picking th epart you want to pick on, to give you an argument.& fit your point of view you would see what the point of th epost was.. you would see  the "If both parties worked together..... and the message and point i was making... the point being its th esame thing different party.....
 whats detremental to thei snation is tha tpeople dont look into voting records, they dont read the bills and the ylisten to the media....maqybe if people took issues into their own hands and sifted through th eBS, they could make informed decisions...
#81 | 1563 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
I'm actually enjoying reading all this. Nice posts ML31, Onegoodredhead2 and senormcslim. If we could just get all Americans to think and politicians to listen. THAT would be an awesome!
thanks pop
#82 | 1563 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
thanks pop
Sure, you're great.
#83 | 1563 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Sure, you're great.
ha! me and tony the tiger? (wink)
#84 | 1563 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

#85 | 1563 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
if you actually read the whole comment instead of picking th epart you want to pick on, to give you an argument.& fit your point of view you would see what the point of th epost was.. you would see  the "If both parties worked together..... and the message and point i was making... the point being its th esame thing different party.....
 whats detremental to thei snation is tha tpeople dont look into voting records, they dont read the bills and the ylisten to the media....maqybe if people took issues into their own hands and sifted through th eBS, they could make informed decisions...
Don't make assumptions.  The one you just made was 100% wrong.

I know what your point was. I read your entire post.  I pointed out that particular comment because it went against what the rest of your post was saying.  You speak of working together, and then say one side should let the other side do what they are trying to do because YOU think it is a great thing.  That is not "working together" in any way.  It is partisanship just like what we have now.  
#86 | 1563 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

senormcslim wrote:
the ideas of freedom and the desire to live a life that brings happiness, thisdreamlives in most of all of us.. but it has been lost in those that have grown to be families of politics .. those that for years have played the game of taking monies from lobbists, vote with the party when it is EZ and to look the other way when the hard tuff views are looking them in the face...
what ever happened with doing the right thing... the good of OUR PEOPLE...when did being popular become more important than being right... we are a nation of many...yet we allow the select few run tis nation that i would think most of us see can not continue... millions of dollars given to states to create but a hand full of jobs, so who got the money,,because the little guy did not ... STOP and LOOK around you... see the game being played and have the WILL to stand and point out the errors of the government ... bridges to no-where, $20,000. street signs, look at the money given to Haiti ..if each adult living in Haiti was given an equal percentage of the money for AID ..each would have been given over $100,000 to restart their lives... yet most are still homeless, still living in poverty.. so like i had said ..where did the money go..big business ..corp. exec. , the little guy did not see it.. but some walked with a big stash of cash.. the 2 party system is failing the people...extrme, moral majority, libral, whatever... this world is in need of HELP... we all need to start looking out for each other and not just ourselves
Hey, I really like that post!
#87 | 1563 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Don't make assumptions.  The one you just made was 100% wrong.

I know what your point was. I read your entire post.  I pointed out that particular comment because it went against what the rest of your post was saying.  You speak of working together, and then say one side should let the other side do what they are trying to do because YOU think it is a great thing.  That is not "working together" in any way.  It is partisanship just like what we have now.  
pa leeze you are constantly trying to tell people what we mean..i wrote the words , i know what my point was and wha tit meant...i was giving an example on the obama and the lil guy getting voted down...time and time again by both parties as i said......if you want to post your own opinion , great do so..but DO JOT tell me what i was aying or thinking..you do not know me well enough and certainly have no clue on how or wha ti think and btw.....(.the votes against extending unemployment only hurt the people that can not find jobs.... their families and their esteem...shame on the senate for taking so long...they certainly didnt mind taking a break over the 4th to enjoy their family time while others worried how their bills would be paid.......obviously YOU are too closed minded to see or care enough about ALL people,because you have your cushy county job.......i happen to care about ALL people,and was giving an example...YOu tend to put your opinion on it..if it is my opinion like tmy long post on this subject,i will put it is my opinion...if YOU* are un able to see the difference between an anology and example and an opinion...its YOUR proble..do not bother me with it
#88 | 1563 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Don't make assumptions.  The one you just made was 100% wrong.

I know what your point was. I read your entire post.  I pointed out that particular comment because it went against what the rest of your post was saying.  You speak of working together, and then say one side should let the other side do what they are trying to do because YOU think it is a great thing.  That is not "working together" in any way.  It is partisanship just like what we have now.  
and also partisanships wrk together...not against each other..just so ya know.....our government certainly has not worked tgether in close to 10 years minimum..thus the whole reason i posted my comments in the first place...
#89 | 1563 days ago

partisanship ...well... during the great depression the congress and senate work as if thy al had a reason to be in office .. the alphabet congress known in its time  was  putting out bill after bill to get the Nation we live in and that i love... back on track... liki had aid before in a prior post ... the idea that almost 20 MILLION was used to put up i think it was 17 signs a  part of the sim-u-less package  .. and  just  a few people actually got jobs  .. i think i read it was  7 full time  employeed ... when in the HELL  ... think about it ...  a job at  50,000 a year   for 10 years is  $500,000  okay let us do the math 2 jobs like that   a cool million..so in my world that  means  40 jobs for at least 10 yers paid for .. in the plan...   butwhat we gotin the REAL world  is  someone  GOT PAID  .. an a couple of  guys  at  like $10.00 an hour  put up signs  and my not have jobs  come  2011...  

we need to stop the bull  ...make those that are  playing the nation for what tey cn get ..and  make things  the way they should be...  wake up America...we the people  need to hold those  wripping us off  accountable ...
#90 | 1562 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
pa leeze you are constantly trying to tell people what we mean..i wrote the words , i know what my point was and wha tit meant...i was giving an example on the obama and the lil guy getting voted down...time and time again by both parties as i said......if you want to post your own opinion , great do so..but DO JOT tell me what i was aying or thinking..you do not know me well enough and certainly have no clue on how or wha ti think and btw.....(.the votes against extending unemployment only hurt the people that can not find jobs.... their families and their esteem...shame on the senate for taking so long...they certainly didnt mind taking a break over the 4th to enjoy their family time while others worried how their bills would be paid.......obviously YOU are too closed minded to see or care enough about ALL people,because you have your cushy county job.......i happen to care about ALL people,and was giving an example...YOu tend to put your opinion on it..if it is my opinion like tmy long post on this subject,i will put it is my opinion...if YOU* are un able to see the difference between an anology and example and an opinion...its YOUR proble..do not bother me with it
You don't need to tell me what you mean.  I can read and comprehend what you say.  I said I read and understood your point.  No need for you to go there.  The example you used was an extremely partisan one.  

I was not telling you what you meant.  I do not understand how you can make that conclusion.  I was pointing out an inconsistency in your post.  That's all.

Don't be a hypocrite and tell me what I care or don't care about.  You don't know me.  Don't make those assumptions.  Like the one you made assuming I didn't read what you wrote.   You have no clue how or what I think.  And unlike you, I can say that at least with some evidence of you publicly making false assumptions about me.  You made your comment not because of anything substantial, but only because you didn't like that I pointed out your hypocrisy.

You also have no idea how "cushy" or not my job is.  No clue whatsoever.   You also have no idea what I have done before it as well.  Again, you are making an assumption based on nothing.  I will thank you to stop doing that.  I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate me saying your work was "cushy" without really knowing what it entailed.  So you might want to think a little harder about doing it to someone else.

For the record, I care about ALL people too.  Which is why I have the opinions I do regarding what is in the best interest of or the best path for this country. 

Look, all I did was point out an inconsistency you made.  I wasn't even offering up an opinion on my part.  And in response I get this crap from you. 

Nice "open minded" thing to do.
#91 | 1562 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
and also partisanships wrk together...not against each other..just so ya know.....our government certainly has not worked tgether in close to 10 years minimum..thus the whole reason i posted my comments in the first place...
I know you get all annoyed at this sort of thing...  But partisans, by definition, do NOT work together. 

1 : a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance


Does that sound like people who "work together"?  It sure doesn't to me.  What I am rooting for is LESS partisanship in DC.  Not more.  Although, it sounds to me like you would only be OK with it so long as everyone agrees with your viewpoint.
#92 | 1561 days ago

ML31 wrote:
You don't need to tell me what you mean.  I can read and comprehend what you say.  I said I read and understood your point.  No need for you to go there.  The example you used was an extremely partisan one.  

I was not telling you what you meant.  I do not understand how you can make that conclusion.  I was pointing out an inconsistency in your post.  That's all.

Don't be a hypocrite and tell me what I care or don't care about.  You don't know me.  Don't make those assumptions.  Like the one you made assuming I didn't read what you wrote.   You have no clue how or what I think.  And unlike you, I can say that at least with some evidence of you publicly making false assumptions about me.  You made your comment not because of anything substantial, but only because you didn't like that I pointed out your hypocrisy.

You also have no idea how "cushy" or not my job is.  No clue whatsoever.   You also have no idea what I have done before it as well.  Again, you are making an assumption based on nothing.  I will thank you to stop doing that.  I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate me saying your work was "cushy" without really knowing what it entailed.  So you might want to think a little harder about doing it to someone else.

For the record, I care about ALL people too.  Which is why I have the opinions I do regarding what is in the best interest of or the best path for this country. 

Look, all I did was point out an inconsistency you made.  I wasn't even offering up an opinion on my part.  And in response I get this crap from you. 

Nice "open minded" thing to do.
eyeroll..you gave us a history of your past work life and what you did in a poll not too long ago..from life guarding to reserves 9and not liking it0 to being on the waer sports teams to your current position........2ndly you only took one line of my post nad commented on it when in deed the next lines were the significant points being made...an anology to make a point  it wasnt inconsistant it was an anology to ge tto a point......funny you dont ever seem to ge tthat cause you are busy disecting each line .........
     
#93 | 1561 days ago

senormcslim wrote:
partisanship ...well... during the great depression the congress and senate work as if thy al had a reason to be in office .. the alphabet congress known in its time  was  putting out bill after bill to get the Nation we live in and that i love... back on track... liki had aid before in a prior post ... the idea that almost 20 MILLION was used to put up i think it was 17 signs a  part of the sim-u-less package  .. and  just  a few people actually got jobs  .. i think i read it was  7 full time  employeed ... when in the HELL  ... think about it ...  a job at  50,000 a year   for 10 years is  $500,000  okay let us do the math 2 jobs like that   a cool million..so in my world that  means  40 jobs for at least 10 yers paid for .. in the plan...   butwhat we gotin the REAL world  is  someone  GOT PAID  .. an a couple of  guys  at  like $10.00 an hour  put up signs  and my not have jobs  come  2011...  

we need to stop the bull  ...make those that are  playing the nation for what tey cn get ..and  make things  the way they should be...  wake up America...we the people  need to hold those  wripping us off  accountable ...
and do you remember during the reagan years and iran contra et al..and the reports about 500 dollar ash trays,and 30 dollars for a screw....if you read my above post(the long one..you would see that both sides do the ame thing...its because of special interest dollars and big business running our government..heck they run every aspect of our lives,really...from what you see on the news to our political process and voting......they have the control..money controls..and untill we make politicians on both sides accountable for their records and decisions..we will have the same problems......   we will teeter  economically ,and in every way....remember all these jobs were lost because of the finiancial institutions,,and that trickled down to affect everyone......wall street and banking and big corp america is what and why jobs have been lost..and peoples lives, homes everything they hve worked for..you have to regulate big business with government or else we see what happens......the job market crashed along with the realestate market banking and wall street industries......less realators lenders, banking staffs, the list goes on..and we can not blame those losses on current government...because its still part of the trickle down......we can t outsource our jobs and complain there arent any..... we have to demand our companies hire and stay here......give incentive ut keep our jobs here.....go look up the growth/job indexes and see when they started to decline  you might be surprised..
#94 | 1561 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
eyeroll..you gave us a history of your past work life and what you did in a poll not too long ago..from life guarding to reserves 9and not liking it0 to being on the waer sports teams to your current position........2ndly you only took one line of my post nad commented on it when in deed the next lines were the significant points being made...an anology to make a point  it wasnt inconsistant it was an anology to ge tto a point......funny you dont ever seem to ge tthat cause you are busy disecting each line .........
     
Eyeroll all you want.  It won't make you right.

I gave a cliff notes version of what I did.  And I gave an opinion for one.  And knowing what I did in the past doesn't give you any insight into how "cushy" it may or may not be.  That was you making stuff up. 
You mentioned what you did as well.  But I was not so arrogant as to make assessments of it when I didn't have full information.  But that didn't seem to stop you.

I cited that line because that was what was inconsistent with the rest of your post.  You spoke of working together and then you turn around and imply that we should all get behind what the President is doing because you think it is beneficial for all.  Such is an opinion not shared by a great many people.  The analogy did not support the rest of what you say.  At all.
If you plan on using analogies, you need to use ones that are not contradictory to the point you are trying to make.

And in my humble opinion, you only got riled up over it because you don't like it when someone who does not share your views 100% points out an inconsistency.   In other words, methinks thou dost protest too much.

I actually liked everything else you wrote. 
#95 | 1561 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

A telling example:

Tea Party Caucus now formed: 
www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx

Inaugural members to the Tea Party Caucus: 42, all Republican affiliated.
bachmann.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx

S-A-R-A-H....go Palin, GO!!!!


*****Fox News will continue to cover the Tea Party in exhausting detail, but denies any suggestion of bias.....
#96 | 1561 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Eyeroll all you want.  It won't make you right.

I gave a cliff notes version of what I did.  And I gave an opinion for one.  And knowing what I did in the past doesn't give you any insight into how "cushy" it may or may not be.  That was you making stuff up. 
You mentioned what you did as well.  But I was not so arrogant as to make assessments of it when I didn't have full information.  But that didn't seem to stop you.

I cited that line because that was what was inconsistent with the rest of your post.  You spoke of working together and then you turn around and imply that we should all get behind what the President is doing because you think it is beneficial for all.  Such is an opinion not shared by a great many people.  The analogy did not support the rest of what you say.  At all.
If you plan on using analogies, you need to use ones that are not contradictory to the point you are trying to make.

And in my humble opinion, you only got riled up over it because you don't like it when someone who does not share your views 100% points out an inconsistency.   In other words, methinks thou dost protest too much.

I actually liked everything else you wrote. 
that is the pot calling the kettle.......but certainly not the point of any of my statement on this thread....and believe me....few  share my views and that completely ok with me......i have seen both sides been involved in both sides and put blame on both sides....again the whole reasoning behind my post was for people to actually READ what the politicians formats are..read the health reform bill,the wallstreet bill et al...my guess is that maybe 10 % have read any of the platforms of their elected officials seen how they have voted or read any legislation out there.......  they get their information from news medias,and public opinion/outcry opposed to actually seeking the facts and making informed decisions..yes its time consuming,and many dont have that much time..hower there are "nutshell" brekdowns of the important issus and facts..and its easy to see how your congressmen and senators vote on issues that represent each of us in our states and lives.......  i wonder how many people have actually even written their elected officials at any point?....
     the point was and is....IF we read what we are voting on we might make btter decisions.....nd that goes for both sides.......i wonder how many senators and congressmen actually read health reform or wallstreet reform before telling their constituents what it said........my guess is not many....
#97 | 1560 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
that is the pot calling the kettle.......but certainly not the point of any of my statement on this thread....and believe me....few  share my views and that completely ok with me......i have seen both sides been involved in both sides and put blame on both sides....again the whole reasoning behind my post was for people to actually READ what the politicians formats are..read the health reform bill,the wallstreet bill et al...my guess is that maybe 10 % have read any of the platforms of their elected officials seen how they have voted or read any legislation out there.......  they get their information from news medias,and public opinion/outcry opposed to actually seeking the facts and making informed decisions..yes its time consuming,and many dont have that much time..hower there are "nutshell" brekdowns of the important issus and facts..and its easy to see how your congressmen and senators vote on issues that represent each of us in our states and lives.......  i wonder how many people have actually even written their elected officials at any point?....
     the point was and is....IF we read what we are voting on we might make btter decisions.....nd that goes for both sides.......i wonder how many senators and congressmen actually read health reform or wallstreet reform before telling their constituents what it said........my guess is not many....
No 'pot-kettle' on my end I can assure you.

At times you have written about blaming both sides...  Which is just fine.  And the gist of your post was about reaching across the line to work together.  Which is great.  But then you went and blamed one entire side for "voting no on everything" and filibustering" the great things you think the President is trying to do.  And you really don't see the inconsistency there?  Really?

It is true that most of the masses don't read the bills introduced to congress.  But to play the devil's advocate here, isn't that what we elect our representatives to do?  This is a Representative Republic, not a true Democracy.

My hope is that the elected representatives do indeed read what they vote on.  But I would not be surprised in any way if they don't.  I have a very cynical view of politicians.  I think most pretty much vote they way their Party and/or their contributors or lobbyists would like them too.
#98 | 1560 days ago

ML31 wrote:
No 'pot-kettle' on my end I can assure you.

At times you have written about blaming both sides...  Which is just fine.  And the gist of your post was about reaching across the line to work together.  Which is great.  But then you went and blamed one entire side for "voting no on everything" and filibustering" the great things you think the President is trying to do.  And you really don't see the inconsistency there?  Really?

It is true that most of the masses don't read the bills introduced to congress.  But to play the devil's advocate here, isn't that what we elect our representatives to do?  This is a Representative Republic, not a true Democracy.

My hope is that the elected representatives do indeed read what they vote on.  But I would not be surprised in any way if they don't.  I have a very cynical view of politicians.  I think most pretty much vote they way their Party and/or their contributors or lobbyists would like them too.
it called giving analogies.& trying to make points  and no its not inconsistent when i admt that BOTh prties continually do it. had i not said that the it would be inconsistent.....if you dont see tha ti dont know what to say....and the point of the analogy was people as usualy got screwed., by the lack of unity..(illuse that word cause we disagree on how partisanship should be used.).By the republicans holding out on unemployment benefits it hurt our fellow americans who are already struggling, had the senator from Wva not passed (rip sir) people wouldnt have received their benefits still. because of the nasty lil gmes washington must play .thus the whole not working together for the peole's sake......it isnt the people's fault the whole work force took a dump..its our politicians fault for screwing with the system for greed sake.  it affected the whole economyand job structure & infrastructure of our country and the integrity not only morally ,but financially, and so forth...iyou dont think these filibusters havent hurt people ? its egos in washing ton that continue to screw the peole...that is why i support a health care reform..if people can collect medicare social security, veterans benefits, and many other government benefits,,wht cant ALL people be entitled to the same? any one taking their social security doesnt think that socialist,,and it isnt....they paid for it...just as every tax paying amrican has the right to receive some sort of fair health care. If they have paid their taxes  then i say lets fnd a systm that is economically fair for everyone and not just big business benefiting........that was the point of that...and yes..i think by passing this current  health care reform american got screwed too i liked the original bill much better.....i think that the medicare system of health care would of been much more cost effective, forced insurance premiums down and closed a gap in private insurance  they are huge ripoffs..when i have frieds whose insurance went up 400 dollars a month, in january becaus eof greedy ins companies, and no regulations,and the get em while you can attitude , i have a problem with that..if you had to pay for your full benefits im sure you wouldnt be happy either....  i see nothing wrong with accountability in health care from hospital who charge 40 bucks for a tylenol t huge administrative bonuses......premiums go up every year regardless of use and its a rip off........the health industry is broken...hospitals want government dollars and accrediation dollars but not accountability...the health care reform that was proposed and was filibustered offered solutions to those very issues....it actually would have saved dollars because it cracks down on illegal use of the system for illegals here..(they would and still even under this bill have to prove proof of citizenship),just like you or i do when we go to the doctor or hospital...we must show our license and proof of self.......then a social security card would be ran to make sure its valid and matches the person...fair and logical....if its an emergency then a person will be treated but if they can not provide proof of legality they are deported.....i think these are good issues being implemented  and yes this is in the current health reform.....there is alot of pork i disagree with but who wanted that? the republicans! it was perks for the healthcare and ins industries and their states(that is why stocks in those industries rose when the bill was passed.......it  is crap...and has no place in a bill.........yes government is overbearing in many areas of our lives...i dont want any one telling me i cant have guns or wha ti can or can not do with my body,or my life.....however we need regulating on business because its always the american people that get hurt,and ripped off and that is what i think is wrong and unfair.....i am for a flat tax and use tax...and eliminate the IRS......I am for a law and tax structure for business much like nevada has..it promotes growth for business and offers incentive for business ..without them outsourcing.......i am for less government in many forms whenit comes to our individual rights..but to run a country effectively and fairly for ALL we nneed regulations on industry..these last gaffs of the past decade has proven exactly why....
   as far as our elected officials..we vote them into represent the majority of our views.....not do our homework for us..it is OUR responcibility to make sure they do their job and represent us..not take for granted they are..of course they should be reading it as well,,BUT so should we...we should be looking how they vote to make sure they are voting for the people and not their lobbyists and special interests..if we DONT look at their records how can we hold them accountable?....
#99 | 1560 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
it called giving analogies.& trying to make points  and no its not inconsistent when i admt that BOTh prties continually do it. had i not said that the it would be inconsistent.....if you dont see tha ti dont know what to say....and the point of the analogy was people as usualy got screwed., by the lack of unity..(illuse that word cause we disagree on how partisanship should be used.).By the republicans holding out on unemployment benefits it hurt our fellow americans who are already struggling, had the senator from Wva not passed (rip sir) people wouldnt have received their benefits still. because of the nasty lil gmes washington must play .thus the whole not working together for the peole's sake......it isnt the people's fault the whole work force took a dump..its our politicians fault for screwing with the system for greed sake.  it affected the whole economyand job structure & infrastructure of our country and the integrity not only morally ,but financially, and so forth...iyou dont think these filibusters havent hurt people ? its egos in washing ton that continue to screw the peole...that is why i support a health care reform..if people can collect medicare social security, veterans benefits, and many other government benefits,,wht cant ALL people be entitled to the same? any one taking their social security doesnt think that socialist,,and it isnt....they paid for it...just as every tax paying amrican has the right to receive some sort of fair health care. If they have paid their taxes  then i say lets fnd a systm that is economically fair for everyone and not just big business benefiting........that was the point of that...and yes..i think by passing this current  health care reform american got screwed too i liked the original bill much better.....i think that the medicare system of health care would of been much more cost effective, forced insurance premiums down and closed a gap in private insurance  they are huge ripoffs..when i have frieds whose insurance went up 400 dollars a month, in january becaus eof greedy ins companies, and no regulations,and the get em while you can attitude , i have a problem with that..if you had to pay for your full benefits im sure you wouldnt be happy either....  i see nothing wrong with accountability in health care from hospital who charge 40 bucks for a tylenol t huge administrative bonuses......premiums go up every year regardless of use and its a rip off........the health industry is broken...hospitals want government dollars and accrediation dollars but not accountability...the health care reform that was proposed and was filibustered offered solutions to those very issues....it actually would have saved dollars because it cracks down on illegal use of the system for illegals here..(they would and still even under this bill have to prove proof of citizenship),just like you or i do when we go to the doctor or hospital...we must show our license and proof of self.......then a social security card would be ran to make sure its valid and matches the person...fair and logical....if its an emergency then a person will be treated but if they can not provide proof of legality they are deported.....i think these are good issues being implemented  and yes this is in the current health reform.....there is alot of pork i disagree with but who wanted that? the republicans! it was perks for the healthcare and ins industries and their states(that is why stocks in those industries rose when the bill was passed.......it  is crap...and has no place in a bill.........yes government is overbearing in many areas of our lives...i dont want any one telling me i cant have guns or wha ti can or can not do with my body,or my life.....however we need regulating on business because its always the american people that get hurt,and ripped off and that is what i think is wrong and unfair.....i am for a flat tax and use tax...and eliminate the IRS......I am for a law and tax structure for business much like nevada has..it promotes growth for business and offers incentive for business ..without them outsourcing.......i am for less government in many forms whenit comes to our individual rights..but to run a country effectively and fairly for ALL we nneed regulations on industry..these last gaffs of the past decade has proven exactly why....
   as far as our elected officials..we vote them into represent the majority of our views.....not do our homework for us..it is OUR responcibility to make sure they do their job and represent us..not take for granted they are..of course they should be reading it as well,,BUT so should we...we should be looking how they vote to make sure they are voting for the people and not their lobbyists and special interests..if we DONT look at their records how can we hold them accountable?....
No need to lecture me on the concept of analogies.  I am well aware of them and often use them myself.   What you did was not so much an analogy but an endorsement of the policies of the current president.  Which again, is fine as it is your opinion.  But you were talking about working together for the common good.  Endorsing one side like you did goes against that theme.  It really is as simple as that.  And no, you did not say both sides do it in that instance.  In fact, if you wanted to make that claim, then you needed to be generic and say something like, both sides when they are 100% against the other will vote no and filibuster it to death instead of trying to make it work.  No need to invoke what the current president is trying to do as that shows you taking a side.  And goes against the overall theme of the post.  

It is also ironic that you bring up the extension of unemployment benefits considering what you said about reading 100% of the legislation.  I won't pretend to know all the ins and outs, but it seems to me that blindly endorsing it shows that you may not be aware of any potential pitfalls and addendums to it as well.  Republicans aren't just saying, "let's screw those unemployed by taking away the benefits."  As someone like Vin would have you believe.  It is possible that there are valid reasons for not extending the benefits.  I am not for or against it at this time.  I am just saying it is possible there is more than you or I may realize.

You ask if the filibusters hurt people?  It depends on what those filibusters are actually stopping.  Some of them are stopping some pretty crappy things that will only make the economic situation even worse.  How would that be helping people?

Health Care reform...  Sure.  But if it is to be reformed, it needs to be reformed in a POSITIVE way.  One that will actually improve care and help more people.  The version endorsed by our President doesn't do that.  This is a case of the current system, as damaged as it is, is better than a Government run one.  
Further, there is no law saying all Americans have a right to health care.  That is not provided for in out constitution.  If you do that, then where do you draw the line?  Should we buy every American a car so we can all get to work or the Government run clinic, too?

All people aren't entitled to Veteran benefits because all people aren't veterans.   Social Security is not a health care system.

The system is far from "fair".  But it can be made more even without screwing up the economy by giving everyone freebies that aren't guaranteed in the Constitution.
Accountability is great.  But you don't need to make the system federal to do that.
The health care bill that was filibustered was massively flawed.  The one that passed was horribly flawed as well.  (Analogy coming up)   If your car won't start, you don't waste your time changing the tires with worse ones.
The version that did not make it, and this could still happen even with the current one, would have led to worse health care for more Americans.  I do not see how that is better for people.

Regulations on business is certainly needed.  But such regulation must be done for the public good and to keep the economy moving.

I like the flat tax in principle as well.  IMHO, the tax code is way too complex.  However, that complexity also means that there could be many factors I am not considering when I say I endorse the flat tax.  

Actually, in a Representative Republic, we kind of are asking our reps to do our homework for us.  That's the very nature of the system.  The idea is, we elect them to represent us so we can devote our time to our work and lives.  If we hear they are not doing what we feel they were elected for, we vote them out.  Although, I am forced to admit that too few people actually take the short time to even take a quick look at what their reps did in their term.
#100 | 1559 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

I so love people that bring up the Constitution when it's convenient for their own desires.   Let's bring the Constitution back; indentured servitude, slavery, trusts......

The "let them eat cake" mentality of those who believe it's the fault of working people that are still under the poverty line shows just how idiotic the essence of greed is in this country.  If there government was truly doing it's job, it would create a universal atmosphere whereas everyone that works can bring home a legitimate living.

The "entitlement mindset" is not just one for those at the lower economic end of the scale.
#101 | 1559 days ago

(Edited by Onegoodredhead2)
ML31 wrote:
No need to lecture me on the concept of analogies.  I am well aware of them and often use them myself.   What you did was not so much an analogy but an endorsement of the policies of the current president.  Which again, is fine as it is your opinion.  But you were talking about working together for the common good.  Endorsing one side like you did goes against that theme.  It really is as simple as that.  And no, you did not say both sides do it in that instance.  In fact, if you wanted to make that claim, then you needed to be generic and say something like, both sides when they are 100% against the other will vote no and filibuster it to death instead of trying to make it work.  No need to invoke what the current president is trying to do as that shows you taking a side.  And goes against the overall theme of the post.  

It is also ironic that you bring up the extension of unemployment benefits considering what you said about reading 100% of the legislation.  I won't pretend to know all the ins and outs, but it seems to me that blindly endorsing it shows that you may not be aware of any potential pitfalls and addendums to it as well.  Republicans aren't just saying, "let's screw those unemployed by taking away the benefits."  As someone like Vin would have you believe.  It is possible that there are valid reasons for not extending the benefits.  I am not for or against it at this time.  I am just saying it is possible there is more than you or I may realize.

You ask if the filibusters hurt people?  It depends on what those filibusters are actually stopping.  Some of them are stopping some pretty crappy things that will only make the economic situation even worse.  How would that be helping people?

Health Care reform...  Sure.  But if it is to be reformed, it needs to be reformed in a POSITIVE way.  One that will actually improve care and help more people.  The version endorsed by our President doesn't do that.  This is a case of the current system, as damaged as it is, is better than a Government run one.  
Further, there is no law saying all Americans have a right to health care.  That is not provided for in out constitution.  If you do that, then where do you draw the line?  Should we buy every American a car so we can all get to work or the Government run clinic, too?

All people aren't entitled to Veteran benefits because all people aren't veterans.   Social Security is not a health care system.

The system is far from "fair".  But it can be made more even without screwing up the economy by giving everyone freebies that aren't guaranteed in the Constitution.
Accountability is great.  But you don't need to make the system federal to do that.
The health care bill that was filibustered was massively flawed.  The one that passed was horribly flawed as well.  (Analogy coming up)   If your car won't start, you don't waste your time changing the tires with worse ones.
The version that did not make it, and this could still happen even with the current one, would have led to worse health care for more Americans.  I do not see how that is better for people.

Regulations on business is certainly needed.  But such regulation must be done for the public good and to keep the economy moving.

I like the flat tax in principle as well.  IMHO, the tax code is way too complex.  However, that complexity also means that there could be many factors I am not considering when I say I endorse the flat tax.  

Actually, in a Representative Republic, we kind of are asking our reps to do our homework for us.  That's the very nature of the system.  The idea is, we elect them to represent us so we can devote our time to our work and lives.  If we hear they are not doing what we feel they were elected for, we vote them out.  Although, I am forced to admit that too few people actually take the short time to even take a quick look at what their reps did in their term.
i am not sayingg all people are entitled to vertans entitlement.,,i didnt say social security was health care i waqs using them as examples as government entitlements...medicare comes along with social security...i was giving expamles of things the government runs that offer health care to people who earn/pay into these entities
    i didnt realize i had to repeat every word in every post and since i wrote both sides in the 1st post ififured people got the drift..as most did.except ....  blindly endorsing unemployment benefits for millions of people that have no jobs or incomes????  seriously..you want to try and say i blindly endorced that????  how many more people need to lose everything for you to be happy? those people are probably all from wha tis happening in nour gulf states and states that are hurt the worst!!!!  do you listen to what you write and how you come acroosss ..do you think these people wantbenefits?? these are people that want their jobs and lives back  but because our government wants to play russina roullette with their lives and our lives...they are out of jobs.....blindly endorse??? ...pfffffffftttttt!
  ok im way too tired and medicated to rebutt this so glad sir norse did.....thanks norse you da man!!!xo
#102 | 1559 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
i am not sayingg all people are entitled to vertans entitlement.,,i didnt say social security was health care i waqs using them as examples as government entitlements...medicare comes along with social security...i was giving expamles of things the government runs that offer health care to people who earn/pay into these entities
    i didnt realize i had to repeat every word in every post and since i wrote both sides in the 1st post ififured people got the drift..as most did.except ....  blindly endorsing unemployment benefits for millions of people that have no jobs or incomes????  seriously..you want to try and say i blindly endorced that????  how many more people need to lose everything for you to be happy? those people are probably all from wha tis happening in nour gulf states and states that are hurt the worst!!!!  do you listen to what you write and how you come acroosss ..do you think these people wantbenefits?? these are people that want their jobs and lives back  but because our government wants to play russina roullette with their lives and our lives...they are out of jobs.....blindly endorse??? ...pfffffffftttttt!
  ok im way too tired and medicated to rebutt this so glad sir norse did.....thanks norse you da man!!!xo
The way your post was worded, it very much sounded like you were saying that everyone should get Veterans benefits and that you were comparing them and social security to health care.  SS is hardly a government entitlement anyway.  Workers pay into it.  In fact, the government is making money of SS.

You do need to be a bit more clear.  No need to repeat every word of every post if you were clear.  I got your initial "drift" as well.  Even in spite of your tremendous inconsistency that I pointed out for your benefit.

I don't know...  It kind of sounds like you are blindly following it.  In my experience, most people who were in favor of it did so only because it "sounded" great and didn't really comprehend the full significance of what it would, or could lead to.  Your reasoning gave no indication you felt otherwise.  I just played the odds with that comment.  I could be wrong, but the odds are way with me on it.

What does "people losing everything" have to do with my happiness?  What the heck would lead you to THAT extreme?  That is just plain nuts.

Redhead, you are all over the map here...  When you say "getting hurt" what do you mean by that?  What does geography have to do with what is being said here?  WTF are you talking about with this silly "russian roulette" comment?  What benefits are you talking about?  You need to focus.  Speaking of reading what one writes....  Are you aware of how scattered your above post is?  Norse didn't address what I said at all, BTW.  He saw one thing I wrote and it inspired him to run off in some weird direction I never went or inferred in any way shape or form.

Yes, I reread what I type.  Occasionally I make a correction here and there.  And I come across as honest and reasoned.  Unlike many others here....
#103 | 1559 days ago

I find it kind of amusing how some people see things only in absolutes.  That a balance cannot possibly be achieved so it shouldn't even be strived for.
#104 | 1559 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

NorseHeathen wrote:
A telling example:

Tea Party Caucus now formed: 
www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx

Inaugural members to the Tea Party Caucus: 42, all Republican affiliated.
bachmann.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx

S-A-R-A-H....go Palin, GO!!!!


*****Fox News will continue to cover the Tea Party in exhausting detail, but denies any suggestion of bias.....
This coming from anyone else I would have ignored. How sad.
#105 | 1559 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Pop_Tart wrote:
This coming from anyone else I would have ignored. How sad.
Initially, I was personally hoping the Tea Party movement would be a renewal of the 1992 Perot movement; whereas independents (tired with the status quo, and business as usual) were banning together to send the government a message.  Alas, it evolved into just another bias faction.
#106 | 1559 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
I find it kind of amusing how some people see things only in absolutes.  That a balance cannot possibly be achieved so it shouldn't even be strived for.
Absolutes???  I don't know from where that could be asserted based upon my contributions.  Balance is what the people arguing with you have been advocating.  Unless you are talking about the essence of compromise that Demopublicans and Republicrats have become the status quo in politics; and what that has accomplished is more for the extreme ends of socio-economic society, whilst the the middle gets squeezed to the point of idiocy.
#107 | 1558 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Absolutes???  I don't know from where that could be asserted based upon my contributions.  Balance is what the people arguing with you have been advocating.  Unless you are talking about the essence of compromise that Demopublicans and Republicrats have become the status quo in politics; and what that has accomplished is more for the extreme ends of socio-economic society, whilst the the middle gets squeezed to the point of idiocy.
You were dealing with an absolute in your earlier comment.  At least, that was how your post read.

While we are at it, I don't know how it could be assessed that I was using the Constitution only when "convienant" nor was I endorsing any kind of "endentured servidtude, slavery or trusts..."  Further,  neither was there any kind of "let them eat cake" mentality anywhere in my writings.  Same goes with the "entitlement mindset".  In fact, I don't even recall writing anything like that or even close to it anywhere.  Let alone this thread.

Based on your posts, I expected better from you.
#108 | 1558 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

NorseHeathen wrote:
Initially, I was personally hoping the Tea Party movement would be a renewal of the 1992 Perot movement; whereas independents (tired with the status quo, and business as usual) were banning together to send the government a message.  Alas, it evolved into just another bias faction.
I'm at the point of hopelessness. If we as friends can't talk about politics I suppose we shouldn't expect much from anyone else in Washington.
#109 | 1558 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

You really need to take time to read the essence of posts.  Listing specific examples does not specify absolutes, but the nature of the ills of a society in effect under the era of our constitution.  No absolutes.....essence of the time and ills therein.

Reading your posts are almost humorous.  You pick bits and pieces from which to respond.  To many, who have even asserted such in their posts, you twist the intent of what your addressing, and still maintain a condescending and lawer-like response by infusing elaborations as to fit your assertions.  Since everyone else is wrong, it must be really difficult for you to exist in our society.

Or is it that you should re-evaluate you own perspectives and methodologies pertaining to how you interact?  Your expectations of me are not even close to relevant in my eyes....nor is your implied parent-like disappointment.  Though I will look forward to your response in the morning as you seem convinced (as per your participation in the Q) that having the last word makes you right.
#110 | 1558 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Pop_Tart wrote:
I'm at the point of hopelessness. If we as friends can't talk about politics I suppose we shouldn't expect much from anyone else in Washington.
Unfortunately, I would attribute such to many factors--including the posturing and presentation from the body politic that has filtered down to the level of every day society.  Other facets of this problem are numerous and include the media (from the selection of stories to the perspective upon which they're presented) and the editorialist renderings passed upon as the gospel truth, institutions of higher education (either liberal or conservative), some churches and church bodies which seem to infuse politics into their ministries, and a general ignorance of the populous in general.  Our founders gave us a charge upon completing the Constitution in that it is the people that are ultimately responsible for the preservation of the ideologies and virtues contained therein.  Again, unfortunately, attributed to personal interests and compromises within that process, the initial laws didn't live up the the virtues upon which it was constructed.

It does seem hopeless at times--I, for one, definitely have experienced that same kind of sentiment.  There are two things that keep my hope alive: 1) every time I look upon a newborn child--peaceful, innocent of the adversities of human existence and an individual mind that could possibly grow to be that very individual that could help to shape society.  Conversely, as has been shown to a pathetic cycle, is that change comes when adversity becomes so great that even the most oblivious and dense in the affected societies become aware and impassioned as to embed themselves within a cause.
#111 | 1558 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
NorseHeathen wrote:
You really need to take time to read the essence of posts.  Listing specific examples does not specify absolutes, but the nature of the ills of a society in effect under the era of our constitution.  No absolutes.....essence of the time and ills therein.

Reading your posts are almost humorous.  You pick bits and pieces from which to respond.  To many, who have even asserted such in their posts, you twist the intent of what your addressing, and still maintain a condescending and lawer-like response by infusing elaborations as to fit your assertions.  Since everyone else is wrong, it must be really difficult for you to exist in our society.

Or is it that you should re-evaluate you own perspectives and methodologies pertaining to how you interact?  Your expectations of me are not even close to relevant in my eyes....nor is your implied parent-like disappointment.  Though I will look forward to your response in the morning as you seem convinced (as per your participation in the Q) that having the last word makes you right.
No need to tell me to take the time to read the essence of posts.  I do.  Although, when you responded with your "convenient constitution" post, it seemed you didn't take the time to follow your own advice.  That response couldn't be more off base.

You don't seem to understand what I am saying when I cite certain sentences.  Again, I thought of all people you would get it.  Let me explain why I do that.  I am NOT taking things out of context.  I do it for the ease of the reader so they know for sure what part I was addressing.  I often will not cite the entire phrase because all I am doing is reminding the person what section I am addressing.  The gist of ALL that was conveyed in the idea.  Not just one bit.

I have NEVER twisted or warped anything anyone has ever said.  The only time anyone has ever made such a claim is when they were unable to find flaws in what I countered with.  It is a cop out.  I have never been condescending to anyone.  It is certainly no coincidence the only ones who have ever claimed that were those who could not find a way to legitimately respond to the points I made.  Or opted not to. 

If I may be so bold, the only person who I have read here who has come across with a condescending, lawyer-like response, ironically, is yourself.  I don't rag on it because I don't think it really matters much as this is just an internet thread.  But since you brought it up I felt it appropriate to point it out.    Your conclusion that I feel "everyone else is wrong" has no basis in anything.  If I really did feel that way I would respond to every post and point out where everyone was wrong.  The fact is I only respond to a very small fraction of posts.  I have absolutely no clue how you can come to such a conclusion.  Further, if I were to extrapolate how you live your life based on the content of your posts and how you write them, I would conclude that something similar about you that you did about me.  But you know what?  I don't because it is a foolish thing to conclude what someones life would be like based only on what is written in internet threads.  Or did you intend the comment to be some sort of childish put down?

You seem affected by my earlier comment of how I expected better of you.  Don't know why you really care that much about my opinion.  but since you do, it's just that you have often come across as one of the more reasoned and well spoken of anyone here.  And to see you make a post that contained such an incredible leap of illogic...  It just seemed out of character for you.  Sorry.

And no, having the last word does not make me "right".  Just as you writing in near legaleze doesn't make you any smarter or better than anyone else.

But, I have every confidence you will find some kind of way to get your little last word in.  If it makes you feel you are the better person, then knock yourself out.
#112 | 1558 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

(snicker)

So predictable....
#113 | 1558 days ago

ML31 wrote:
No need to tell me to take the time to read the essence of posts.  I do.  Although, when you responded with your "convenient constitution" post, it seemed you didn't take the time to follow your own advice.  That response couldn't be more off base.

You don't seem to understand what I am saying when I cite certain sentences.  Again, I thought of all people you would get it.  Let me explain why I do that.  I am NOT taking things out of context.  I do it for the ease of the reader so they know for sure what part I was addressing.  I often will not cite the entire phrase because all I am doing is reminding the person what section I am addressing.  The gist of ALL that was conveyed in the idea.  Not just one bit.

I have NEVER twisted or warped anything anyone has ever said.  The only time anyone has ever made such a claim is when they were unable to find flaws in what I countered with.  It is a cop out.  I have never been condescending to anyone.  It is certainly no coincidence the only ones who have ever claimed that were those who could not find a way to legitimately respond to the points I made.  Or opted not to. 

If I may be so bold, the only person who I have read here who has come across with a condescending, lawyer-like response, ironically, is yourself.  I don't rag on it because I don't think it really matters much as this is just an internet thread.  But since you brought it up I felt it appropriate to point it out.    Your conclusion that I feel "everyone else is wrong" has no basis in anything.  If I really did feel that way I would respond to every post and point out where everyone was wrong.  The fact is I only respond to a very small fraction of posts.  I have absolutely no clue how you can come to such a conclusion.  Further, if I were to extrapolate how you live your life based on the content of your posts and how you write them, I would conclude that something similar about you that you did about me.  But you know what?  I don't because it is a foolish thing to conclude what someones life would be like based only on what is written in internet threads.  Or did you intend the comment to be some sort of childish put down?

You seem affected by my earlier comment of how I expected better of you.  Don't know why you really care that much about my opinion.  but since you do, it's just that you have often come across as one of the more reasoned and well spoken of anyone here.  And to see you make a post that contained such an incredible leap of illogic...  It just seemed out of character for you.  Sorry.

And no, having the last word does not make me "right".  Just as you writing in near legaleze doesn't make you any smarter or better than anyone else.

But, I have every confidence you will find some kind of way to get your little last word in.  If it makes you feel you are the better person, then knock yourself out.
in the thread regarding the government and blame..i gave you links to several imformative links..and you said they didnt come up...then when the ydid you picked one article.out of over 1 million..and of cours eit was fox news..the most bias news channel ever.....i prefer more independent news articles that are written by real journalists who are not paid by a political side to take their view point..i also suggsted you go to my thread on the bp oil spill which had tons of great links to prove the points i and others made....you said it was too much work when all you had to do is jus tgo to my wall page and clcik on the thread there......you have een right with some of your arguments.......however many times you only give or say what you feel is your subjective take on what someone else wrote..when word is involved you can not (and most certainly should not assume you know more than th eperson who wrote,what they meant.......you dont..and i will be the first to admit that i may not be the most eloquent writer and have a hard time getting my feelings across( except for song writing which i do very well)...and it irks me to  no end when you tell me what i meant.....its very patronizing...  your view is not always right or will alway be argrred upon,,just like all of us here....but when people disagree you find a way to disect every word into your interpretation of others feelings.... then you find that snide  attitude and attack people who really have some great input  because they calll you out....i dont ge tthat.....just like you are doing to sir norse ...  when in actuality he stays very neutral and mostly just puts up facts not opinions....
#114 | 1558 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
This coming from anyone else I would have ignored. How sad.
why is it sad,because sir norse put it up?...he is right the tea party is nothing more than extreme right republicns......
#115 | 1558 days ago

ML31 wrote:
The way your post was worded, it very much sounded like you were saying that everyone should get Veterans benefits and that you were comparing them and social security to health care.  SS is hardly a government entitlement anyway.  Workers pay into it.  In fact, the government is making money of SS.

You do need to be a bit more clear.  No need to repeat every word of every post if you were clear.  I got your initial "drift" as well.  Even in spite of your tremendous inconsistency that I pointed out for your benefit.

I don't know...  It kind of sounds like you are blindly following it.  In my experience, most people who were in favor of it did so only because it "sounded" great and didn't really comprehend the full significance of what it would, or could lead to.  Your reasoning gave no indication you felt otherwise.  I just played the odds with that comment.  I could be wrong, but the odds are way with me on it.

What does "people losing everything" have to do with my happiness?  What the heck would lead you to THAT extreme?  That is just plain nuts.

Redhead, you are all over the map here...  When you say "getting hurt" what do you mean by that?  What does geography have to do with what is being said here?  WTF are you talking about with this silly "russian roulette" comment?  What benefits are you talking about?  You need to focus.  Speaking of reading what one writes....  Are you aware of how scattered your above post is?  Norse didn't address what I said at all, BTW.  He saw one thing I wrote and it inspired him to run off in some weird direction I never went or inferred in any way shape or form.

Yes, I reread what I type.  Occasionally I make a correction here and there.  And I come across as honest and reasoned.  Unlike many others here....
the gulf states are being hurt because everytime the y recover from one disaster another strikes and this latest one has hurt them...you know what i mean..because of what we are discussing..it hurts them in the pocket book, ecomony and geography has much to do with it because 1/4 of the united states are being affected by this oil spill on top of a recession..they have lost their seafood, tourist,and many other trickle down industries because of it..that is hurt...... russian roulette refers to what our government does by degegulating major industries..if you dont understand tha tanalogy i dont know what to say.... and most certainly socal security is an entitlement...people that pay into it are entitled to it......  there is nothing scattered about my post if you have read my comments from the first one..they make sense,i just may not be so eloquent as many in my wording   people losing  everyhing ,in my opinion has no affect on you by your posts thus my comment......that is just my opinion....that you dont much care what others have gone through.....nd that saddens me....  you may think you come across as honest an reasoned but ..i feel you come across with your opinions and your views points not the facts........sometime yes you post a fact but mostly i see them s your opinion..as i am sure many do..
#116 | 1557 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
in the thread regarding the government and blame..i gave you links to several imformative links..and you said they didnt come up...then when the ydid you picked one article.out of over 1 million..and of cours eit was fox news..the most bias news channel ever.....i prefer more independent news articles that are written by real journalists who are not paid by a political side to take their view point..i also suggsted you go to my thread on the bp oil spill which had tons of great links to prove the points i and others made....you said it was too much work when all you had to do is jus tgo to my wall page and clcik on the thread there......you have een right with some of your arguments.......however many times you only give or say what you feel is your subjective take on what someone else wrote..when word is involved you can not (and most certainly should not assume you know more than th eperson who wrote,what they meant.......you dont..and i will be the first to admit that i may not be the most eloquent writer and have a hard time getting my feelings across( except for song writing which i do very well)...and it irks me to  no end when you tell me what i meant.....its very patronizing...  your view is not always right or will alway be argrred upon,,just like all of us here....but when people disagree you find a way to disect every word into your interpretation of others feelings.... then you find that snide  attitude and attack people who really have some great input  because they calll you out....i dont ge tthat.....just like you are doing to sir norse ...  when in actuality he stays very neutral and mostly just puts up facts not opinions....
*sigh*

You are rehashing THIS again?  Why?

Reminder...  You did not provide links.  Someone else did.  The one link you attempted to provide didn't work.  It was to a search engine.  Your response was to tell me to go look it up for myself.  Well...  I did that.  In the first few pages of my own searching I found ONE result that MIGHT be relevant.   Or did you forget all that?  

Good luck finding independent journalists.  Almost all of them insert their own personal slant into what they write.  When reading such things, it is important to understand the writer's point of view.  And digest the article accordingly.

If it were so easy to provide links, why didn't you just provide them?  If you were so anxious to make your point, why not make it as easy as possible for any doubters?  Yet you provided precious little except your word.  Forgive me, but I need things a bit more concrete that that.

There is no need to be irked.  I have never once told you what you meant.  I have only reacted to what you said.  If you think I did, that is your issue.  Not mine.  One that ought to be dealt with if you plan to continue writing posts on internet threads. 
Nor have I ever made "interpretations of others feelings".  I'm not a therapist.  And this is merely an internet thread.  Once again, I honestly have no idea where you pulled that one out of.
You know, what you say about a view not always being right...  The same thing goes back to you as well.  In a thread where opinions are dished out on a regular basis, I normally don't take the time to say "in my opinion" every time it comes up.  I figured, perhaps incorrectly it seems, that the readers know what this place is and know the difference between someone saying something like "Red is the best color ever!" and someone saying "2+2=4".

Look, I have a characteristic where I tend to respond in the same manor in which I was treated.  I try not to do it but sometimes it just slips out.  Therefore, if I really am copping an attitude in any response, it is because someone did it to me first.  That doesn't make it legit and yes, two wrongs don't make a right.  But it does happen with me.  

I didn't attack anyone.  In fact, it was Norse who made the snide comment that was obviously inspired by what I wrote.  Not only was it snippy, but it was 100% false and made no sense whatsoever.  Why should I NOT clear things up?
#117 | 1557 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
why is it sad,because sir norse put it up?...he is right the tea party is nothing more than extreme right republicns......
Perhaps you should say, "in my opinion".

Some people here may not get that. 
#118 | 1557 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
the gulf states are being hurt because everytime the y recover from one disaster another strikes and this latest one has hurt them...you know what i mean..because of what we are discussing..it hurts them in the pocket book, ecomony and geography has much to do with it because 1/4 of the united states are being affected by this oil spill on top of a recession..they have lost their seafood, tourist,and many other trickle down industries because of it..that is hurt...... russian roulette refers to what our government does by degegulating major industries..if you dont understand tha tanalogy i dont know what to say.... and most certainly socal security is an entitlement...people that pay into it are entitled to it......  there is nothing scattered about my post if you have read my comments from the first one..they make sense,i just may not be so eloquent as many in my wording   people losing  everyhing ,in my opinion has no affect on you by your posts thus my comment......that is just my opinion....that you dont much care what others have gone through.....nd that saddens me....  you may think you come across as honest an reasoned but ..i feel you come across with your opinions and your views points not the facts........sometime yes you post a fact but mostly i see them s your opinion..as i am sure many do..
So you are saying Gulf Coast disasters are the fault of politicians?  Or Republicans in general? 

1/4 of the US?  Do you mean 77 million people are affected or 12 1/2 states?  Either way I think you are exaggerating just a tad.  First, there are only 5 states on the Gulf coast.  That is 1/10th of the United States.  Next, the total population of those 5 states is about 55-56 million.  (Only 18% of the USA pop.)  And not ALL of them are affected by this.  Are you exaggerating for effect or do you really believe the 1/4 of the US thing?

I understand the concept of the analogy.  It's just that your post was not coherent and not making sense.  Now that you pointed out what you meant, I get it.  The "Russian roulette" thing is an analogy that doesn't work.  However I do see your intent.

You really think your post wasn't all over the map?  Go read it again.  Where do you think all my questions about it came from?  I don't make this stuff up, you know.  Some of the comments I recalled from earlier conversations with you but they had no business being used in the context you used them.  It made little to no sense.  I understand your writing thing.  Except for that particular post, I get and am able to comprehend what you write.  Being "eloquent" is not a requirement.

My bad on the "entitlement" thing.  I looked the word up and was surprised by what I saw.  I thought that an "entitlement" was getting something extra by contract or law.  Like, you are entitled to an inheritence if you are specified as getting it.  Or used another way...  Some vain people might think they are entitled to special treatment in some places just because they are who they are.  But the definition just reads " a right to benefits specified especially by law or contract" and " a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group".  Wow.  Learn something new every day.

I have no idea how you can conclude what you did.  Nothing in my writings suggests I don't care.  In fact, the subject matter of the posts was about cause.  Not about caring.  I don't recall ever talking about caring about those who were hurt by the incident.  Perhaps my memory is bad.  How about telling me where I actually said anything that could be interpreted as I don't care?  Also, the very idea that you think that makes me some kind of unemotional monster in your book.  Which just isn't a realistic line of thinking.

I have news for you....  In my posts my opinions come across as honest and well reasoned (with a few exceptions )  Plus, pretty much everything here is opinions and viewpoints.  Your posts are just as full of them as mine are.  99% of what is written here is opinion.

I still am trusting that most people understand the difference between presenting a fact and presenting an opinion without having to announce it every single time.
#119 | 1557 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
why is it sad,because sir norse put it up?...he is right the tea party is nothing more than extreme right republicns......
You are so wrong.
errrrrr  
#120 | 1557 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Unfortunately, I would attribute such to many factors--including the posturing and presentation from the body politic that has filtered down to the level of every day society.  Other facets of this problem are numerous and include the media (from the selection of stories to the perspective upon which they're presented) and the editorialist renderings passed upon as the gospel truth, institutions of higher education (either liberal or conservative), some churches and church bodies which seem to infuse politics into their ministries, and a general ignorance of the populous in general.  Our founders gave us a charge upon completing the Constitution in that it is the people that are ultimately responsible for the preservation of the ideologies and virtues contained therein.  Again, unfortunately, attributed to personal interests and compromises within that process, the initial laws didn't live up the the virtues upon which it was constructed.

It does seem hopeless at times--I, for one, definitely have experienced that same kind of sentiment.  There are two things that keep my hope alive: 1) every time I look upon a newborn child--peaceful, innocent of the adversities of human existence and an individual mind that could possibly grow to be that very individual that could help to shape society.  Conversely, as has been shown to a pathetic cycle, is that change comes when adversity becomes so great that even the most oblivious and dense in the affected societies become aware and impassioned as to embed themselves within a cause.
Please tell me what kind of society do you want shaped here in the US.
errrrrr  
#121 | 1557 days ago

cuddles127017 wrote:
You are so wrong.
my sister in law worked for president reagan for 8 years... i know exactly what the tea party is..its an extension of the republican party...just much more right wing extreme  i am not wrong
#122 | 1557 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
my sister in law worked for president reagan for 8 years... i know exactly what the tea party is..its an extension of the republican party...just much more right wing extreme  i am not wrong
yes you are hun,  The tea party is made up of all kinds of people except dems.  Granted they are mostly white and Conservative but they love this country and believe in what the founding fathers wanted for this country.  They are not the extreme right, there i will grant you again you will find some that are.  It's your everyday hard working American. (that is not a democrat).  They don't like the wars and spending that Bush done anymore than you or the next guy.  Their main concern is they don't like the direction this country is going and the way Obama is leading us.  If you have never read the Underground Weather Communist, Marxist Manifesto of 1969.  For those of you that love Obama and the present Dem party, i suggest you read that.  Unless you are a communist loving person that should make the blood shoot out of your eyes.
errrrrr  
#123 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
*sigh*

You are rehashing THIS again?  Why?

Reminder...  You did not provide links.  Someone else did.  The one link you attempted to provide didn't work.  It was to a search engine.  Your response was to tell me to go look it up for myself.  Well...  I did that.  In the first few pages of my own searching I found ONE result that MIGHT be relevant.   Or did you forget all that?  

Good luck finding independent journalists.  Almost all of them insert their own personal slant into what they write.  When reading such things, it is important to understand the writer's point of view.  And digest the article accordingly.

If it were so easy to provide links, why didn't you just provide them?  If you were so anxious to make your point, why not make it as easy as possible for any doubters?  Yet you provided precious little except your word.  Forgive me, but I need things a bit more concrete that that.

There is no need to be irked.  I have never once told you what you meant.  I have only reacted to what you said.  If you think I did, that is your issue.  Not mine.  One that ought to be dealt with if you plan to continue writing posts on internet threads. 
Nor have I ever made "interpretations of others feelings".  I'm not a therapist.  And this is merely an internet thread.  Once again, I honestly have no idea where you pulled that one out of.
You know, what you say about a view not always being right...  The same thing goes back to you as well.  In a thread where opinions are dished out on a regular basis, I normally don't take the time to say "in my opinion" every time it comes up.  I figured, perhaps incorrectly it seems, that the readers know what this place is and know the difference between someone saying something like "Red is the best color ever!" and someone saying "2+2=4".

Look, I have a characteristic where I tend to respond in the same manor in which I was treated.  I try not to do it but sometimes it just slips out.  Therefore, if I really am copping an attitude in any response, it is because someone did it to me first.  That doesn't make it legit and yes, two wrongs don't make a right.  But it does happen with me.  

I didn't attack anyone.  In fact, it was Norse who made the snide comment that was obviously inspired by what I wrote.  Not only was it snippy, but it was 100% false and made no sense whatsoever.  Why should I NOT clear things up?
I did supply links..and as i have said at least 1/2 a dozen times..all you had to do is go to the thread..and they were all right there..i said just go to my all and scroll down to the thread and click on it......that wasnt asking too much,,and since most of us know i am IT chllenged tht was the best i could do..you didnt put in the effort to read...Vkantwes taye lso posted threads and info as did norse and vin.....yet you said we didnt......we doid..you chose not to follow them up....which is fim ee your choice...  everyone else that was interested didnt seem to find it difficult to find the links off the thread..even drummer and the other gentleman from louisana posted some as well..it isnt our responcibility to supply them with them..we offered you the thread and made it easy to get to it from my wall at the time..why didnt you just clik on my wall? /I provided tons of links on the other thread i keep mentioning that you never even went to..so do not try and pawn this off on me.... and the search engine i supplied had over 25,000 pages...  i did make it easy for the doubters...only you didnt put forth 2 clicks to get to my wall.....hd i known how to copy and put it here from hre i would have so the next easiest thing was to wrte a comment so it was right there on my page..you didnt go..
  at leas thatmany people will be affected...not just the gulf states but the tourists that would come, the peopl that buy the seafood, the retailes, the markets,the wildlife, the coast of fla, and the east coast and their seafood,are yrt to be seen.if you truly cn not see the size of the economic disaster this will have by trickling dow,,again im stumped... i think i am being conservative in my numbers actually..remember his will affect inland people,their busineses,and any where these satates ship their product...and this isnt even taking into account if this starts to catch the gulf streamand moves into the east coast....   or life lost etc.....
#124 | 1557 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

cuddles127017 wrote:
You are so wrong.
You are right cuddles, she is so wrong. I'll be commenting on that later today.
#125 | 1557 days ago
vindog (+)

cuddles127017 wrote:
yes you are hun,  The tea party is made up of all kinds of people except dems.  Granted they are mostly white and Conservative but they love this country and believe in what the founding fathers wanted for this country.  They are not the extreme right, there i will grant you again you will find some that are.  It's your everyday hard working American. (that is not a democrat).  They don't like the wars and spending that Bush done anymore than you or the next guy.  Their main concern is they don't like the direction this country is going and the way Obama is leading us.  If you have never read the Underground Weather Communist, Marxist Manifesto of 1969.  For those of you that love Obama and the present Dem party, i suggest you read that.  Unless you are a communist loving person that should make the blood shoot out of your eyes.
 It's your everyday hard working American. (that is not a democrat).    Are you saying that Democrats are NOT hard working Americans?  Just trying to clarify this statement before I blow numerous holes into this idiotic theory of yours. Please clarify!
hmmmmmmmm  
#126 | 1557 days ago

vindog wrote:
 It's your everyday hard working American. (that is not a democrat).    Are you saying that Democrats are NOT hard working Americans?  Just trying to clarify this statement before I blow numerous holes into this idiotic theory of yours. Please clarify!
I think she meant "everyday hard working American republican" rather than "hard working Americans are not democrats" ...that's how I read it anyway.
#127 | 1557 days ago
vindog (+)

Jess wrote:
I think she meant "everyday hard working American republican" rather than "hard working Americans are not democrats" ...that's how I read it anyway.
So basically she is saying that the Team Party is nothing but a bunch of Republicans- just like Mimi was saying right? So I dont see where the argument is in this fiasco.
hmmmmmmmm  
#128 | 1557 days ago

vindog wrote:
So basically she is saying that the Team Party is nothing but a bunch of Republicans- just like Mimi was saying right? So I dont see where the argument is in this fiasco.
That, I'm not sure...she would be able to shed some light on that. I just know that I didn't think her comment was saying democrats aren't hard working. :)
#129 | 1557 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
I did supply links..and as i have said at least 1/2 a dozen times..all you had to do is go to the thread..and they were all right there..i said just go to my all and scroll down to the thread and click on it......that wasnt asking too much,,and since most of us know i am IT chllenged tht was the best i could do..you didnt put in the effort to read...Vkantwes taye lso posted threads and info as did norse and vin.....yet you said we didnt......we doid..you chose not to follow them up....which is fim ee your choice...  everyone else that was interested didnt seem to find it difficult to find the links off the thread..even drummer and the other gentleman from louisana posted some as well..it isnt our responcibility to supply them with them..we offered you the thread and made it easy to get to it from my wall at the time..why didnt you just clik on my wall? /I provided tons of links on the other thread i keep mentioning that you never even went to..so do not try and pawn this off on me.... and the search engine i supplied had over 25,000 pages...  i did make it easy for the doubters...only you didnt put forth 2 clicks to get to my wall.....hd i known how to copy and put it here from hre i would have so the next easiest thing was to wrte a comment so it was right there on my page..you didnt go..
  at leas thatmany people will be affected...not just the gulf states but the tourists that would come, the peopl that buy the seafood, the retailes, the markets,the wildlife, the coast of fla, and the east coast and their seafood,are yrt to be seen.if you truly cn not see the size of the economic disaster this will have by trickling dow,,again im stumped... i think i am being conservative in my numbers actually..remember his will affect inland people,their busineses,and any where these satates ship their product...and this isnt even taking into account if this starts to catch the gulf streamand moves into the east coast....   or life lost etc.....
You SAID you did it.  But you never actually did provide links.  Except the one to a search engine that didn't work.  I wasn't about to go look for an old thread I may or may not have commented in.  You want to show your links, you show them.  Don't make the other guy go looking for them.  You don't seem to be so IT challenged that you couldn't post them before.  There was no reason you couldn't post them again.  

I didn't put in the effort to read?  Wrong.  I read every word you wrote in the thread.  You were the one who didn't make the effort to support your cause with outside and accountable sources.  You have a bad habit of making assumptions based on what you wish was the case. 

As I already said, there was one person who actually responded to my request for links.  The links were examined.  Your memory on this matter seems to be as faulty as your thoughts on deregulation.

If it were so easy to find the links, why not show them to me when I ask?  It really isn't that hard.  Like I said, you did it before.  You can do it again.  (Or did you?)  And when I did my own search (I have told you this already) I found next to nothing supporting your claims.  Yet you seemed to think it was right there plain as day for all to see.  When I can't find it but you can...  You know what the solution to that is?   Wait for it...    You provide the links!  The ball was in your hands and you fumbled.

Don't say "everyone else who was interested" found the links.  That is patently false.  Only one other person even made an attempt to post links when I asked for them.  ONE.  Further, when you say "everyone else" you seem to be thinking of only the two other people who agreed with you.

Why should I go to your wall?  I had no reason to trust they would be there.  You said if I used a search engine and type in the very same words you said you did I would find tons of stuff supporting you.  Yet when I did that I found nothing.  Zero.  Nada.  You lost a lot of capital after that.  Besides...  Why are you refusing to support your take?  The fact that you spent so very much time NOT providing information or data speaks volumes for what you likely really think of your own reasoning.

Again, you provided a link to a search that DIDN'T WORK.  Again, I used the very same words you used and did my own search.  Yes, thousands of pages came up.  But that doesn't mean the ALL support your case.  In fact, in the first 6 pages of results, there was but ONE link that kinda sorta maybe if you hold it at the right angle might back what you claimed.  If you had something better than that, you need to provide it.  I did my due dilligince and came up empty.  But I shouldn't even of had to do THAT.  You should have provided the links to begin with.  And even after I came up empty, you still refused to provide anything.

I would ask you to provide evidence that 77 million people are affected by the spill.  But I suspect you will just demand that I do all the legwork.  I know the spill is big and it does indeed affect a great many people.  But 77 million is simply nuts.  If what you say is true, you should have no problem supporting it.  But I realize now that backing up what you say just isn't your style.
#130 | 1557 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Pop_Tart wrote:
You are right cuddles, she is so wrong. I'll be commenting on that later today.
The tea party was born out of a disgust for Bush.  It was originally a bunch of Americans fed up with Gov't spending and a concern for the economic welfare of the country.  It was made up of many different kinds of folk.  Yes, even Democrats.  (who were in the minority but they were there.)

But then over time, as what happens with many organizations (like Unions), it grew to the point where it really morphed into something it wasn't created for.  In this case, into a more Republican like platform.  I have never been involved with it but looking from afar, it sure doesn't seem like the same thing that it started as.  It seems that many who were there at the beginning are no longer a part of it.

Ironically (but not unexpectedly) when they first started the media totally ignored the movement.  It wasn't until it morphed away from it's original intent when it started getting air time on the "mainstream" networks. 
#131 | 1557 days ago

vindog wrote:
 It's your everyday hard working American. (that is not a democrat).    Are you saying that Democrats are NOT hard working Americans?  Just trying to clarify this statement before I blow numerous holes into this idiotic theory of yours. Please clarify!
No dear, just calm down.  There are Democrats that are just as hard working and maybe more so.  i was really thinking of independents  and mostly i was thinking i don't think many democrats are at the tea parties.  Maybe a few.
errrrrr  
#132 | 1557 days ago

vindog wrote:
So basically she is saying that the Team Party is nothing but a bunch of Republicans- just like Mimi was saying right? So I dont see where the argument is in this fiasco.
No, Mims was saying they were extreme right wing  Republicans.  I say that most are not extreme but ordinary citizens with a  conservative view.   Center-right.  Hope that clears it up for ya. 
errrrrr  
#133 | 1557 days ago
vindog (+)

cuddles127017 wrote:
No, Mims was saying they were extreme right wing  Republicans.  I say that most are not extreme but ordinary citizens with a  conservative view.   Center-right.  Hope that clears it up for ya. 
It does somewhat, however those with "Conservative Views" are NOT center right. Conservatism is FAR RIGHT and ALWAYS has been- so Mims IS right in what she said. Maybe not ALL are "extremists" per-say but Conservatives are VERY FAR right and have ALWAYS been the base of the Republican Party. So in reality, the Tea Party is nothing more than than the "Conservative Faction" of the Republican Party and nothing more or "new" to the political scene. Candidates like Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney have ALWAYS been Right Wing Conservatives and NOW are somehow something different? LOL  They are the SAME political figures they were in 2008 and their views are VERY Extreme Right Wing philosophies that have been around forever and it's nothing new at all. The problem with the Tea Party (IMHO) is that they ARE NOT towards the "center" of the political spectrum- they ARE far right and the majority of this Country is more towards the center- that's a fact. Hell I would have voted for John McCain had he not chosen an Extremist to be his running mate- but I will NOT allow a person to control MY COUNTRY that has views such as Sarah Palin does- I enjoy my FREEDOMS way too much than to allow a person with a Religious Agenda controlling my everyday life and Palin represents those views AND IS a Tea Party leader!  The rest of the "Tea Party Agenda" is nothing but window dressing to disguise the TRUE agenda behind the Party!
hmmmmmmmm  
#134 | 1557 days ago

Speaking of extremist views....
#135 | 1557 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

(Edited by NorseHeathen)
cuddles127017 wrote:
Please tell me what kind of society do you want shaped here in the US.
Well, fortunately, the foundation for the greatest country in the world is already in place; the U.S. Constitution is still the greatest formed structure for government yet formed--a document that has been the framework for many nations since its inception.

The problem is, as through almost countless examples in history, people.

In short, I would like to see a society that dedicated itself to virtues.  I could easily turn this post into a book of examples--many have been written.  So, I just give a broad example of a few of what I consider to be major issues:
Greed: People need to assert the virtue of fairness--whereas the acquisition of wealth is not at the expense of those from whom their wealth is attained.  Trickle down economics would work, but not when those who control the flow of capitol seek to accumulate more than they'll ever need at the expense of work to provide such.  People need to overcome selfishness and recognize the economic health of the entire work spectrum is vital towards the prosperity of all.  For example, if an engine costs $1,000, and the oil to lubricate the engine is only $10, it's doesn't mean you can ignore the 'health' of the oil.  What happens to an engine when it is run without changing the oil--then engine's effectiveness degrades as sludge is generated, and if further ignored the engine ceases to work.  There is such a thing as "stupid rich" and people that believe those who acquire wealth at the expense of those who help generate such is an 'entitlement' mindset that needs to be regulated.

Another facet that needs to be changed is a recognition of people's contribution to society.  When a working family lives at a lower standard of living than those who receive what they have in resources and benefits from those who do work--something is severely WRONG!  We are not an uncivilized people (despite the fact that we still ignore the homeless).  People that choose not to work are should be provided the very basic needs only--work entitles freedoms, not mere existence.  Food, shelter, and medical care.  Food to be limited to that which such people can cook--no chips, candy, and other unnecessary conveniences.  Food will be provided for heath, clothing for necessity, shelter for living.  Television will be provided for basic programming for entertainment and information.  Doesn't sound fair?  I know several working families that are limited to the lower grade food-stuffs such as meat, shop at charity stores for clothes for their kids and have little other than the necessities--and they WORK!  If this sounds "mean" then your perceptions are severely twisted.

Education is something that should be made accessable to EVERYONE.  When a child of a person who makes a lot of money is given a free education in the form of grants without consideration as to their academic records, whilst someone from a low-wage family that has achieved high honours in their academic achievement but have to take loans for their education with rolling interest that becomes double the initial loan amount by graduation, that is the product of an economic oligarchy.  Financial aid should be based upon academic achievement--not the economic establishment of a student's parents.  That is another 'entitlement' mindset that needs to be changed.  Furthermore, there should be established a channel for education that will serve the needs of society.  English, English as a second language, History, or any other academic discipline that contributes to general society should be provided through media sources (such as television) with the opportunity to test for proficiency an attain a certificate which will provide as a foundation to further one's education in a formal institution, or contribute to the work-force.  The first (and with some disciplines even the second) year of college is a joke when one considers it could be done through self-study and such knowledge would only benefit society as a whole.  For those who, through circumstance (family requirements, economic restrictions, or a need to strengthen academic skills / knowledge, the ability to work independently to attain official recognition for proficiency through self-dedication and independent efforts.  A huge problem that is brought up are immigrants that can't speak English.  Why is there not an educational channel where an individual can facilitate their need to learn a new language?  As one who's traveled to foreign countries, anyone that criticizes the grammar or limitation of word usage for someone that is trying to learn a new language is a complete idiot; at least the individual in question is trying to learn--there should be a channel that offers programing that allows people to work on their own to benefit society as a whole.  In addition, there should be other languages offered in the same manner as well--people would do well to broaden their own perspective by learning new languages.

****I'll continue in another post--right now I need a break.  I'm working on a new project which has put me in front of the computer for 12 hours a day for the past week, so I'm a bit burned out.  I will next approach a few of the social concerns that I believe are important.  Granted, anything I write is just a 'drop in the bucket' considering all of the variables in both economic and social considerations.  I encourage people who read the above to understand that my writings are not an extensive analysis for any specific subject, but general overviews and should be taken in a broader sense than any one or two specific examples.  The  question facing our society were easy, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.*****
#136 | 1557 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
why is it sad,because sir norse put it up?...he is right the tea party is nothing more than extreme right republicns......
Of all the Q members NorseHeathen is the one I respect the most. I see him as an extremely fair and intelligent person never speaking without tact, unlike others. For someone I see as a voice of reason the Tea Party picture seemed out of character. For a minute I thought someone hijacked his keyboard! I was surprised and saddened. In answer to my comment he shows what a classy person he really is. Just like I thought he would. 

Your post is insulting and cruel. In your rush to judge me you threw respect right out the window. In the future if you treat me with respect I will always return the favor.
#137 | 1557 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

NorseHeathen wrote:
Well, fortunately, the foundation for the greatest country in the world is already in place; the U.S. Constitution is still the greatest formed structure for government yet formed--a document that has been the framework for many nations since its inception.

The problem is, as through almost countless examples in history, people.

In short, I would like to see a society that dedicated itself to virtues.  I could easily turn this post into a book of examples--many have been written.  So, I just give a broad example of a few of what I consider to be major issues:
Greed: People need to assert the virtue of fairness--whereas the acquisition of wealth is not at the expense of those from whom their wealth is attained.  Trickle down economics would work, but not when those who control the flow of capitol seek to accumulate more than they'll ever need at the expense of work to provide such.  People need to overcome selfishness and recognize the economic health of the entire work spectrum is vital towards the prosperity of all.  For example, if an engine costs $1,000, and the oil to lubricate the engine is only $10, it's doesn't mean you can ignore the 'health' of the oil.  What happens to an engine when it is run without changing the oil--then engine's effectiveness degrades as sludge is generated, and if further ignored the engine ceases to work.  There is such a thing as "stupid rich" and people that believe those who acquire wealth at the expense of those who help generate such is an 'entitlement' mindset that needs to be regulated.

Another facet that needs to be changed is a recognition of people's contribution to society.  When a working family lives at a lower standard of living than those who receive what they have in resources and benefits from those who do work--something is severely WRONG!  We are not an uncivilized people (despite the fact that we still ignore the homeless).  People that choose not to work are should be provided the very basic needs only--work entitles freedoms, not mere existence.  Food, shelter, and medical care.  Food to be limited to that which such people can cook--no chips, candy, and other unnecessary conveniences.  Food will be provided for heath, clothing for necessity, shelter for living.  Television will be provided for basic programming for entertainment and information.  Doesn't sound fair?  I know several working families that are limited to the lower grade food-stuffs such as meat, shop at charity stores for clothes for their kids and have little other than the necessities--and they WORK!  If this sounds "mean" then your perceptions are severely twisted.

Education is something that should be made accessable to EVERYONE.  When a child of a person who makes a lot of money is given a free education in the form of grants without consideration as to their academic records, whilst someone from a low-wage family that has achieved high honours in their academic achievement but have to take loans for their education with rolling interest that becomes double the initial loan amount by graduation, that is the product of an economic oligarchy.  Financial aid should be based upon academic achievement--not the economic establishment of a student's parents.  That is another 'entitlement' mindset that needs to be changed.  Furthermore, there should be established a channel for education that will serve the needs of society.  English, English as a second language, History, or any other academic discipline that contributes to general society should be provided through media sources (such as television) with the opportunity to test for proficiency an attain a certificate which will provide as a foundation to further one's education in a formal institution, or contribute to the work-force.  The first (and with some disciplines even the second) year of college is a joke when one considers it could be done through self-study and such knowledge would only benefit society as a whole.  For those who, through circumstance (family requirements, economic restrictions, or a need to strengthen academic skills / knowledge, the ability to work independently to attain official recognition for proficiency through self-dedication and independent efforts.  A huge problem that is brought up are immigrants that can't speak English.  Why is there not an educational channel where an individual can facilitate their need to learn a new language?  As one who's traveled to foreign countries, anyone that criticizes the grammar or limitation of word usage for someone that is trying to learn a new language is a complete idiot; at least the individual in question is trying to learn--there should be a channel that offers programing that allows people to work on their own to benefit society as a whole.  In addition, there should be other languages offered in the same manner as well--people would do well to broaden their own perspective by learning new languages.

****I'll continue in another post--right now I need a break.  I'm working on a new project which has put me in front of the computer for 12 hours a day for the past week, so I'm a bit burned out.  I will next approach a few of the social concerns that I believe are important.  Granted, anything I write is just a 'drop in the bucket' considering all of the variables in both economic and social considerations.  I encourage people who read the above to understand that my writings are not an extensive analysis for any specific subject, but general overviews and should be taken in a broader sense than any one or two specific examples.  The  question facing our society were easy, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.*****
Why this man doesn't serve on the presidents cabinet somewhere I'll never know!
#138 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
You SAID you did it.  But you never actually did provide links.  Except the one to a search engine that didn't work.  I wasn't about to go look for an old thread I may or may not have commented in.  You want to show your links, you show them.  Don't make the other guy go looking for them.  You don't seem to be so IT challenged that you couldn't post them before.  There was no reason you couldn't post them again.  

I didn't put in the effort to read?  Wrong.  I read every word you wrote in the thread.  You were the one who didn't make the effort to support your cause with outside and accountable sources.  You have a bad habit of making assumptions based on what you wish was the case. 

As I already said, there was one person who actually responded to my request for links.  The links were examined.  Your memory on this matter seems to be as faulty as your thoughts on deregulation.

If it were so easy to find the links, why not show them to me when I ask?  It really isn't that hard.  Like I said, you did it before.  You can do it again.  (Or did you?)  And when I did my own search (I have told you this already) I found next to nothing supporting your claims.  Yet you seemed to think it was right there plain as day for all to see.  When I can't find it but you can...  You know what the solution to that is?   Wait for it...    You provide the links!  The ball was in your hands and you fumbled.

Don't say "everyone else who was interested" found the links.  That is patently false.  Only one other person even made an attempt to post links when I asked for them.  ONE.  Further, when you say "everyone else" you seem to be thinking of only the two other people who agreed with you.

Why should I go to your wall?  I had no reason to trust they would be there.  You said if I used a search engine and type in the very same words you said you did I would find tons of stuff supporting you.  Yet when I did that I found nothing.  Zero.  Nada.  You lost a lot of capital after that.  Besides...  Why are you refusing to support your take?  The fact that you spent so very much time NOT providing information or data speaks volumes for what you likely really think of your own reasoning.

Again, you provided a link to a search that DIDN'T WORK.  Again, I used the very same words you used and did my own search.  Yes, thousands of pages came up.  But that doesn't mean the ALL support your case.  In fact, in the first 6 pages of results, there was but ONE link that kinda sorta maybe if you hold it at the right angle might back what you claimed.  If you had something better than that, you need to provide it.  I did my due dilligince and came up empty.  But I shouldn't even of had to do THAT.  You should have provided the links to begin with.  And even after I came up empty, you still refused to provide anything.

I would ask you to provide evidence that 77 million people are affected by the spill.  But I suspect you will just demand that I do all the legwork.  I know the spill is big and it does indeed affect a great many people.  But 77 million is simply nuts.  If what you say is true, you should have no problem supporting it.  But I realize now that backing up what you say just isn't your style.
you are ridicilous.....all you had to do is click on my wall at that point in time and the thread was right there, but you didnt want to..many people told you the links were there...i shouldnt have to supply you with anything..when i had already in a different thread..if you wereinterested you could have read it..but you chose not to....the things toy knit pick on...seriously....!by the way the link worked just fine when i clicked on it at the time..and you said it didnt work ...no one else had a problem..but wht ever......no i didnt know how to get it to another thread but yes i can copy and paste from internet sometime..other times it dosnt work.....i never said 77 million as an excat you did by your theory of mulitplyingwhat ever figures you used......how many business do you think supplied seafood to food distrubition industries throughout the country...grocery stores food suppliers et al...if you fuigure in the trickle down effect of this and what it will do to the industy ,and to gas prices you can bet it will affect all of us...gas has alreay risen 30 cents since the spill..yes it been gradual but it is going up.that affects all of us..as does the cost of seafood when its not in supply it will go up..many things will affectalmost all americans because of this spill..THAT was the point and how i came up with an estmated number.....stop trying to break everything down in an exact.......no one knos the exact number of people this will affect yet or how many will die,and the cost and affect of the clean up ,whic h will add costs indirectly to all of us,because these people dont have jobs so wiill need federal aid.......its a big picture that YOU obviously dont get...... ..and dont tell me i cant bak up wha ti say..i did..and you can ask any one who followed that thread....I am noresponcible for doing your leg work to prove a point...you argued it and couldnt come up with one valid argument..isnt it funny that everyone spoke up and agreed except you? ,that everyone else interested found the thread and the links but you....maybe its you who didnt want to read the truth..im done with this conversation with you
#139 | 1557 days ago

cuddles127017 wrote:
yes you are hun,  The tea party is made up of all kinds of people except dems.  Granted they are mostly white and Conservative but they love this country and believe in what the founding fathers wanted for this country.  They are not the extreme right, there i will grant you again you will find some that are.  It's your everyday hard working American. (that is not a democrat).  They don't like the wars and spending that Bush done anymore than you or the next guy.  Their main concern is they don't like the direction this country is going and the way Obama is leading us.  If you have never read the Underground Weather Communist, Marxist Manifesto of 1969.  For those of you that love Obama and the present Dem party, i suggest you read that.  Unless you are a communist loving person that should make the blood shoot out of your eyes.
when i sat extreme right wing i am not saying extremists..i am saying they are  not moderate republicans..they are very or extremely right wingers.........if youtook it as extremist i didnt mean that......they certainly are not moderate republicans by any means and certainly not in this state...see sharon angle....
#140 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Perhaps you should say, "in my opinion".

Some people here may not get that. 
you are correct  i forget that people do not automaticall know most comments are our own opinions,usually ,,ecept when they are backed by facts.thanks...(i am not being sarcastic byw..) whne you are right i gladly admit it
#141 | 1557 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Of all the Q members NorseHeathen is the one I respect the most. I see him as an extremely fair and intelligent person never speaking without tact, unlike others. For someone I see as a voice of reason the Tea Party picture seemed out of character. For a minute I thought someone hijacked his keyboard! I was surprised and saddened. In answer to my comment he shows what a classy person he really is. Just like I thought he would. 

Your post is insulting and cruel. In your rush to judge me you threw respect right out the window. In the future if you treat me with respect I will always return the favor.
it was one question,  how in the world was it insulting and cruel/ if anything you saying it was :sad" norse put it up would be considered that. much more than a simple tactful question.....i merely asked you why it was sad?.. how am i judging you? i simply asked you a question.....
    that question in no way judged you and how you took it as such is beyond me.....
   and i believe you were the one who cslled me an idiot for no reason...which is a personal attack yet i let it go...,,but i ask a simple ,tactful question and you say i insult and judge you....wow
#142 | 1557 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
when i sat extreme right wing i am not saying extremists..i am saying they are  not moderate republicans..they are very or extremely right wingers.........if youtook it as extremist i didnt mean that......they certainly are not moderate republicans by any means and certainly not in this state...see sharon angle....
HERE IS THE FACE OF THE TEA PARTY IN NEVADA, NOW YOU TELL ME IF "SOME" TEA PARTY LEADERS AREN'T EXTREMISTS:

  http://www.examiner.com/x-21777-Las-Vegas-Democrat-Examiner~y2010m6d11-Sharron-Angle-is-an-extremist--not-a-conservative
hmmmmmmmm  
#143 | 1557 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
you are ridicilous.....all you had to do is click on my wall at that point in time and the thread was right there, but you didnt want to..many people told you the links were there...i shouldnt have to supply you with anything..when i had already in a different thread..if you wereinterested you could have read it..but you chose not to....the things toy knit pick on...seriously....!by the way the link worked just fine when i clicked on it at the time..and you said it didnt work ...no one else had a problem..but wht ever......no i didnt know how to get it to another thread but yes i can copy and paste from internet sometime..other times it dosnt work.....i never said 77 million as an excat you did by your theory of mulitplyingwhat ever figures you used......how many business do you think supplied seafood to food distrubition industries throughout the country...grocery stores food suppliers et al...if you fuigure in the trickle down effect of this and what it will do to the industy ,and to gas prices you can bet it will affect all of us...gas has alreay risen 30 cents since the spill..yes it been gradual but it is going up.that affects all of us..as does the cost of seafood when its not in supply it will go up..many things will affectalmost all americans because of this spill..THAT was the point and how i came up with an estmated number.....stop trying to break everything down in an exact.......no one knos the exact number of people this will affect yet or how many will die,and the cost and affect of the clean up ,whic h will add costs indirectly to all of us,because these people dont have jobs so wiill need federal aid.......its a big picture that YOU obviously dont get...... ..and dont tell me i cant bak up wha ti say..i did..and you can ask any one who followed that thread....I am noresponcible for doing your leg work to prove a point...you argued it and couldnt come up with one valid argument..isnt it funny that everyone spoke up and agreed except you? ,that everyone else interested found the thread and the links but you....maybe its you who didnt want to read the truth..im done with this conversation with you
I'm ridiculous?  All yo had to do was cut and paste a link.  It's not hard.  You claim you did it before.  If true I can think of no reason why you wouldn't do it again.  Why so stubborn on the issue?   First of all, you said it was in some other thread.  Not on your wall.  Next, no one but you claimed it was elsewhere.  And if someone else was claiming it was elsewhere, they could have provided a link to it themselves.  There have been other threads where I asked where things were and people have no problem making a link.  You are the only one who refuses.  I can only theorize why.

The link did not work when I clicked on it.  There is no way you could know if it worked for "everyone" else since there was no message in the thread saying it worked.  I told you this in that thread.  Your response was to tell me to go look for myself.  So I did.  As I said before (why do I have to keep repeating this?)  I found next to nothing in my search.  Strange result when, according to you, the net was just bursting at the seams with data to support you.  Of course, when confronted with this you provided nothing.  You chose not to back up what you claimed.  Your choice but it does tend to discredit you on other topics.

No, you did not give and exact number.  But you did say that 77 million was a "conservative" estimate.  And I said that was nuts.  I went on to explain that I did not expect you to support that "estimate" because based on your previous behavior, supporting your case with outside data doesn't seem to be your M.O.

I never made any kind of estimate except that based on the population of the gulf states (a known FACT, btw) I concluded that 77 million was an insanely high guess.  Not sure what data you used to arrive at the 77 million MINIMUM.  But it can't be based on real world demographics.

I have no idea how many business use gulf coast seafood.  But I can figure it certainly isn't close to a few MILLION.  Plus, the gulf coast is not the one and only supplier of those goods throughout the nation.

I was wondering if you were going to bring up fuel prices.  That is a complex thing.  Fuel normally goes up in the summer anyway.  Any fuel costs added due to that event have thus far been negligible.  And not likely to change in the future.  Oil companies are quick to add to fuel costs.  There was a refinery fire a few years ago here and before the current loads of fuel in the ground were empty the prices shot up 6-10 cents the next day.  So I am seriously doubting it will have any future effect.  It if did, it was minute.  No one is going to loose their home because gas goes up 2 cents because of that spill.

It seems reasonable to me that the total people who were going to be affected by this have already been affected.  That figure does not look to go up.  No reason for it to.  You are acting like this spill can be equated to the Great Depression!  Good grief...  Get real!

Fine.  You say you did back it up.  Prove it and the comment will be retracted.  All you need to do is post a few credible links that support you.  It doesn't matter what anyone else "says".  Actions speak louder than words.  You claim you did it once.  It should pose no trouble for you to do it again.  That is...  Unless you really didn't in the first place...  Say it ain't so....

You are not responsible for anything I do or don't do.  Don't worry about that.  But you keep forgetting that I DID do a search just as you suggested to and came up with nothing.  Like I said, I did my due diligence.  Please stop lying about that.  It is not becoming.

You don't seem to be understanding what was going on there.  All I asked was for you to provide evidence to support your claim.  I wasn't making a claim of my own.  I was, and still am, open to whatever may come my way.  It's just that what you claimed didn't ring as factual or even true.  So I wanted to know what you had that led you to your conclusion.  I wasn't arguing a point.  Just asking about yours.

Again, a misuse of the word "everyone".  Unless by "everyone" you mean two people with the same political bend as you.
I was the only one who actually ASKED you to back up what you said.

Of course you are done.  Because you have NOTHING to back yourself up with.  If you did, you would have provided it and this wouldn't be happening.

Don't worry.  I have learned not to expect you to back up any conclusion you have made.  I know you won't do it.
#144 | 1557 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
you are correct  i forget that people do not automaticall know most comments are our own opinions,usually ,,ecept when they are backed by facts.thanks...(i am not being sarcastic byw..) whne you are right i gladly admit it
LOL!!!

You don't know.  Now more than ever I feel I need to classify opinions from fact with you.

Opinions are still opinions even when they were arrived at based on facts.  Or, feelings, as in your case...
#145 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
LOL!!!

You don't know.  Now more than ever I feel I need to classify opinions from fact with you.

Opinions are still opinions even when they were arrived at based on facts.  Or, feelings, as in your case...
hmmmm i was only referring to that one comment....dont start..
#146 | 1557 days ago

vindog wrote:
HERE IS THE FACE OF THE TEA PARTY IN NEVADA, NOW YOU TELL ME IF "SOME" TEA PARTY LEADERS AREN'T EXTREMISTS:

  http://www.examiner.com/x-21777-Las-Vegas-Democrat-Examiner~y2010m6d11-Sharron-Angle-is-an-extremist--not-a-conservative
she is whacked...i wouldnt even call her an extremist...she is sooo far past that! thanks for postin vindog!hugs
#147 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I'm ridiculous?  All yo had to do was cut and paste a link.  It's not hard.  You claim you did it before.  If true I can think of no reason why you wouldn't do it again.  Why so stubborn on the issue?   First of all, you said it was in some other thread.  Not on your wall.  Next, no one but you claimed it was elsewhere.  And if someone else was claiming it was elsewhere, they could have provided a link to it themselves.  There have been other threads where I asked where things were and people have no problem making a link.  You are the only one who refuses.  I can only theorize why.

The link did not work when I clicked on it.  There is no way you could know if it worked for "everyone" else since there was no message in the thread saying it worked.  I told you this in that thread.  Your response was to tell me to go look for myself.  So I did.  As I said before (why do I have to keep repeating this?)  I found next to nothing in my search.  Strange result when, according to you, the net was just bursting at the seams with data to support you.  Of course, when confronted with this you provided nothing.  You chose not to back up what you claimed.  Your choice but it does tend to discredit you on other topics.

No, you did not give and exact number.  But you did say that 77 million was a "conservative" estimate.  And I said that was nuts.  I went on to explain that I did not expect you to support that "estimate" because based on your previous behavior, supporting your case with outside data doesn't seem to be your M.O.

I never made any kind of estimate except that based on the population of the gulf states (a known FACT, btw) I concluded that 77 million was an insanely high guess.  Not sure what data you used to arrive at the 77 million MINIMUM.  But it can't be based on real world demographics.

I have no idea how many business use gulf coast seafood.  But I can figure it certainly isn't close to a few MILLION.  Plus, the gulf coast is not the one and only supplier of those goods throughout the nation.

I was wondering if you were going to bring up fuel prices.  That is a complex thing.  Fuel normally goes up in the summer anyway.  Any fuel costs added due to that event have thus far been negligible.  And not likely to change in the future.  Oil companies are quick to add to fuel costs.  There was a refinery fire a few years ago here and before the current loads of fuel in the ground were empty the prices shot up 6-10 cents the next day.  So I am seriously doubting it will have any future effect.  It if did, it was minute.  No one is going to loose their home because gas goes up 2 cents because of that spill.

It seems reasonable to me that the total people who were going to be affected by this have already been affected.  That figure does not look to go up.  No reason for it to.  You are acting like this spill can be equated to the Great Depression!  Good grief...  Get real!

Fine.  You say you did back it up.  Prove it and the comment will be retracted.  All you need to do is post a few credible links that support you.  It doesn't matter what anyone else "says".  Actions speak louder than words.  You claim you did it once.  It should pose no trouble for you to do it again.  That is...  Unless you really didn't in the first place...  Say it ain't so....

You are not responsible for anything I do or don't do.  Don't worry about that.  But you keep forgetting that I DID do a search just as you suggested to and came up with nothing.  Like I said, I did my due diligence.  Please stop lying about that.  It is not becoming.

You don't seem to be understanding what was going on there.  All I asked was for you to provide evidence to support your claim.  I wasn't making a claim of my own.  I was, and still am, open to whatever may come my way.  It's just that what you claimed didn't ring as factual or even true.  So I wanted to know what you had that led you to your conclusion.  I wasn't arguing a point.  Just asking about yours.

Again, a misuse of the word "everyone".  Unless by "everyone" you mean two people with the same political bend as you.
I was the only one who actually ASKED you to back up what you said.

Of course you are done.  Because you have NOTHING to back yourself up with.  If you did, you would have provided it and this wouldn't be happening.

Don't worry.  I have learned not to expect you to back up any conclusion you have made.  I know you won't do it.
kantwestaye posted links drummer and norse and vin all saw the threads.and the links were in the thread on here....i posted links from internet on the thread..you are confusing 2 issues..i said go to my wall to the thread,,the links were in that...it isnt rocket science.....and yes others did click on the link with all the articles as they posted links for you
#148 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I'm ridiculous?  All yo had to do was cut and paste a link.  It's not hard.  You claim you did it before.  If true I can think of no reason why you wouldn't do it again.  Why so stubborn on the issue?   First of all, you said it was in some other thread.  Not on your wall.  Next, no one but you claimed it was elsewhere.  And if someone else was claiming it was elsewhere, they could have provided a link to it themselves.  There have been other threads where I asked where things were and people have no problem making a link.  You are the only one who refuses.  I can only theorize why.

The link did not work when I clicked on it.  There is no way you could know if it worked for "everyone" else since there was no message in the thread saying it worked.  I told you this in that thread.  Your response was to tell me to go look for myself.  So I did.  As I said before (why do I have to keep repeating this?)  I found next to nothing in my search.  Strange result when, according to you, the net was just bursting at the seams with data to support you.  Of course, when confronted with this you provided nothing.  You chose not to back up what you claimed.  Your choice but it does tend to discredit you on other topics.

No, you did not give and exact number.  But you did say that 77 million was a "conservative" estimate.  And I said that was nuts.  I went on to explain that I did not expect you to support that "estimate" because based on your previous behavior, supporting your case with outside data doesn't seem to be your M.O.

I never made any kind of estimate except that based on the population of the gulf states (a known FACT, btw) I concluded that 77 million was an insanely high guess.  Not sure what data you used to arrive at the 77 million MINIMUM.  But it can't be based on real world demographics.

I have no idea how many business use gulf coast seafood.  But I can figure it certainly isn't close to a few MILLION.  Plus, the gulf coast is not the one and only supplier of those goods throughout the nation.

I was wondering if you were going to bring up fuel prices.  That is a complex thing.  Fuel normally goes up in the summer anyway.  Any fuel costs added due to that event have thus far been negligible.  And not likely to change in the future.  Oil companies are quick to add to fuel costs.  There was a refinery fire a few years ago here and before the current loads of fuel in the ground were empty the prices shot up 6-10 cents the next day.  So I am seriously doubting it will have any future effect.  It if did, it was minute.  No one is going to loose their home because gas goes up 2 cents because of that spill.

It seems reasonable to me that the total people who were going to be affected by this have already been affected.  That figure does not look to go up.  No reason for it to.  You are acting like this spill can be equated to the Great Depression!  Good grief...  Get real!

Fine.  You say you did back it up.  Prove it and the comment will be retracted.  All you need to do is post a few credible links that support you.  It doesn't matter what anyone else "says".  Actions speak louder than words.  You claim you did it once.  It should pose no trouble for you to do it again.  That is...  Unless you really didn't in the first place...  Say it ain't so....

You are not responsible for anything I do or don't do.  Don't worry about that.  But you keep forgetting that I DID do a search just as you suggested to and came up with nothing.  Like I said, I did my due diligence.  Please stop lying about that.  It is not becoming.

You don't seem to be understanding what was going on there.  All I asked was for you to provide evidence to support your claim.  I wasn't making a claim of my own.  I was, and still am, open to whatever may come my way.  It's just that what you claimed didn't ring as factual or even true.  So I wanted to know what you had that led you to your conclusion.  I wasn't arguing a point.  Just asking about yours.

Again, a misuse of the word "everyone".  Unless by "everyone" you mean two people with the same political bend as you.
I was the only one who actually ASKED you to back up what you said.

Of course you are done.  Because you have NOTHING to back yourself up with.  If you did, you would have provided it and this wouldn't be happening.

Don't worry.  I have learned not to expect you to back up any conclusion you have made.  I know you won't do it.
they didn aske me not did all the people in that particular thread because they read it for them selves....3 people posted links argued with you on your points that mine were valid.....you are just unreasonable as usual..you can say i dont bak up my facts..all you want.....many have posted exactly what i said in that previous thread and the one you supposedly couldnt find.
#149 | 1557 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I'm ridiculous?  All yo had to do was cut and paste a link.  It's not hard.  You claim you did it before.  If true I can think of no reason why you wouldn't do it again.  Why so stubborn on the issue?   First of all, you said it was in some other thread.  Not on your wall.  Next, no one but you claimed it was elsewhere.  And if someone else was claiming it was elsewhere, they could have provided a link to it themselves.  There have been other threads where I asked where things were and people have no problem making a link.  You are the only one who refuses.  I can only theorize why.

The link did not work when I clicked on it.  There is no way you could know if it worked for "everyone" else since there was no message in the thread saying it worked.  I told you this in that thread.  Your response was to tell me to go look for myself.  So I did.  As I said before (why do I have to keep repeating this?)  I found next to nothing in my search.  Strange result when, according to you, the net was just bursting at the seams with data to support you.  Of course, when confronted with this you provided nothing.  You chose not to back up what you claimed.  Your choice but it does tend to discredit you on other topics.

No, you did not give and exact number.  But you did say that 77 million was a "conservative" estimate.  And I said that was nuts.  I went on to explain that I did not expect you to support that "estimate" because based on your previous behavior, supporting your case with outside data doesn't seem to be your M.O.

I never made any kind of estimate except that based on the population of the gulf states (a known FACT, btw) I concluded that 77 million was an insanely high guess.  Not sure what data you used to arrive at the 77 million MINIMUM.  But it can't be based on real world demographics.

I have no idea how many business use gulf coast seafood.  But I can figure it certainly isn't close to a few MILLION.  Plus, the gulf coast is not the one and only supplier of those goods throughout the nation.

I was wondering if you were going to bring up fuel prices.  That is a complex thing.  Fuel normally goes up in the summer anyway.  Any fuel costs added due to that event have thus far been negligible.  And not likely to change in the future.  Oil companies are quick to add to fuel costs.  There was a refinery fire a few years ago here and before the current loads of fuel in the ground were empty the prices shot up 6-10 cents the next day.  So I am seriously doubting it will have any future effect.  It if did, it was minute.  No one is going to loose their home because gas goes up 2 cents because of that spill.

It seems reasonable to me that the total people who were going to be affected by this have already been affected.  That figure does not look to go up.  No reason for it to.  You are acting like this spill can be equated to the Great Depression!  Good grief...  Get real!

Fine.  You say you did back it up.  Prove it and the comment will be retracted.  All you need to do is post a few credible links that support you.  It doesn't matter what anyone else "says".  Actions speak louder than words.  You claim you did it once.  It should pose no trouble for you to do it again.  That is...  Unless you really didn't in the first place...  Say it ain't so....

You are not responsible for anything I do or don't do.  Don't worry about that.  But you keep forgetting that I DID do a search just as you suggested to and came up with nothing.  Like I said, I did my due diligence.  Please stop lying about that.  It is not becoming.

You don't seem to be understanding what was going on there.  All I asked was for you to provide evidence to support your claim.  I wasn't making a claim of my own.  I was, and still am, open to whatever may come my way.  It's just that what you claimed didn't ring as factual or even true.  So I wanted to know what you had that led you to your conclusion.  I wasn't arguing a point.  Just asking about yours.

Again, a misuse of the word "everyone".  Unless by "everyone" you mean two people with the same political bend as you.
I was the only one who actually ASKED you to back up what you said.

Of course you are done.  Because you have NOTHING to back yourself up with.  If you did, you would have provided it and this wouldn't be happening.

Don't worry.  I have learned not to expect you to back up any conclusion you have made.  I know you won't do it.
just because you were not involved in that prticular thread where i posted the links and others saw them does not make me a liar or unture..they were there..i am not going to argue this with you any more....the links were on that thread..i am not going to seach through a million hits once again to find them..you can...if i can find the htread i will gladly link you to the thread....dont sit here and ry to throw this on me because you didnt read the thread...we all did, and in the other thread you are referringto where you asked for facts many posted links for you...you have selected memory
#150 | 1557 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Well, fortunately, the foundation for the greatest country in the world is already in place; the U.S. Constitution is still the greatest formed structure for government yet formed--a document that has been the framework for many nations since its inception.

The problem is, as through almost countless examples in history, people.

In short, I would like to see a society that dedicated itself to virtues.  I could easily turn this post into a book of examples--many have been written.  So, I just give a broad example of a few of what I consider to be major issues:
Greed: People need to assert the virtue of fairness--whereas the acquisition of wealth is not at the expense of those from whom their wealth is attained.  Trickle down economics would work, but not when those who control the flow of capitol seek to accumulate more than they'll ever need at the expense of work to provide such.  People need to overcome selfishness and recognize the economic health of the entire work spectrum is vital towards the prosperity of all.  For example, if an engine costs $1,000, and the oil to lubricate the engine is only $10, it's doesn't mean you can ignore the 'health' of the oil.  What happens to an engine when it is run without changing the oil--then engine's effectiveness degrades as sludge is generated, and if further ignored the engine ceases to work.  There is such a thing as "stupid rich" and people that believe those who acquire wealth at the expense of those who help generate such is an 'entitlement' mindset that needs to be regulated.

Another facet that needs to be changed is a recognition of people's contribution to society.  When a working family lives at a lower standard of living than those who receive what they have in resources and benefits from those who do work--something is severely WRONG!  We are not an uncivilized people (despite the fact that we still ignore the homeless).  People that choose not to work are should be provided the very basic needs only--work entitles freedoms, not mere existence.  Food, shelter, and medical care.  Food to be limited to that which such people can cook--no chips, candy, and other unnecessary conveniences.  Food will be provided for heath, clothing for necessity, shelter for living.  Television will be provided for basic programming for entertainment and information.  Doesn't sound fair?  I know several working families that are limited to the lower grade food-stuffs such as meat, shop at charity stores for clothes for their kids and have little other than the necessities--and they WORK!  If this sounds "mean" then your perceptions are severely twisted.

Education is something that should be made accessable to EVERYONE.  When a child of a person who makes a lot of money is given a free education in the form of grants without consideration as to their academic records, whilst someone from a low-wage family that has achieved high honours in their academic achievement but have to take loans for their education with rolling interest that becomes double the initial loan amount by graduation, that is the product of an economic oligarchy.  Financial aid should be based upon academic achievement--not the economic establishment of a student's parents.  That is another 'entitlement' mindset that needs to be changed.  Furthermore, there should be established a channel for education that will serve the needs of society.  English, English as a second language, History, or any other academic discipline that contributes to general society should be provided through media sources (such as television) with the opportunity to test for proficiency an attain a certificate which will provide as a foundation to further one's education in a formal institution, or contribute to the work-force.  The first (and with some disciplines even the second) year of college is a joke when one considers it could be done through self-study and such knowledge would only benefit society as a whole.  For those who, through circumstance (family requirements, economic restrictions, or a need to strengthen academic skills / knowledge, the ability to work independently to attain official recognition for proficiency through self-dedication and independent efforts.  A huge problem that is brought up are immigrants that can't speak English.  Why is there not an educational channel where an individual can facilitate their need to learn a new language?  As one who's traveled to foreign countries, anyone that criticizes the grammar or limitation of word usage for someone that is trying to learn a new language is a complete idiot; at least the individual in question is trying to learn--there should be a channel that offers programing that allows people to work on their own to benefit society as a whole.  In addition, there should be other languages offered in the same manner as well--people would do well to broaden their own perspective by learning new languages.

****I'll continue in another post--right now I need a break.  I'm working on a new project which has put me in front of the computer for 12 hours a day for the past week, so I'm a bit burned out.  I will next approach a few of the social concerns that I believe are important.  Granted, anything I write is just a 'drop in the bucket' considering all of the variables in both economic and social considerations.  I encourage people who read the above to understand that my writings are not an extensive analysis for any specific subject, but general overviews and should be taken in a broader sense than any one or two specific examples.  The  question facing our society were easy, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.*****
Can't say i disagree with anything you have written and you are right anything we say we want for our country becomes very complicated because  there are so many different variables.  It is very complicated.  I think that is one of the smart things about our founding fathers, we each have a right to pursue our own happiness without government telling us how to do it.  I am for the individual  pursuing their own happiness and not some group or the government telling us or them how they have to do it.  The problem lies in government thinking they know what is best for the people and not themselves.  We are already the most generous country in the world and that because we are a Christian  nation.  I for one have faith in the people, the government doesn't.  Greed can only be taken care of by God.  Man cannot force other men into it.  That is communism.
errrrrr  
#151 | 1557 days ago

vindog wrote:
HERE IS THE FACE OF THE TEA PARTY IN NEVADA, NOW YOU TELL ME IF "SOME" TEA PARTY LEADERS AREN'T EXTREMISTS:

  http://www.examiner.com/x-21777-Las-Vegas-Democrat-Examiner~y2010m6d11-Sharron-Angle-is-an-extremist--not-a-conservative
Sweetie! Sweetie! Sweetie!   The Democrat Examiner?   Give me a break.   That's Harry Reid's plan to smear her all he can.  I thought maybe there was a viedo of her saying something very extreme right.  I don't believe anything much the press tells me without checking it out.
OK  When i speak about the Tea Party, i am talking about the people not the speakers.   Yes there are all kinds of speakers from extreme right all the way to left.  There are all kinds of branches of the Tea Party.
The Tea Party is a movement of the people  not the speakers.  We will listen to most any of them that are running and then when we go into the voting booth, we make our own decision.  You know the speakers are gonna jump on the band wagon and say what they think the people want to hear but  New's Alert,   We the People are informed and not easily led down just any road.
errrrrr  
#152 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
LOL!!!

You don't know.  Now more than ever I feel I need to classify opinions from fact with you.

Opinions are still opinions even when they were arrived at based on facts.  Or, feelings, as in your case...
Hey ML, try the link below.

If this does indeed root back to Bush and Cheney's deregulating, then, that's just the facts! Look at the video as well. Seems to me, BP was being cheap and putting ppls lives in danger at the same time. Also, I usually don't look at MSNBC, and I'm sure you'll say they have an agenda, at the same time, you can't deny facts that are true, no matter where it comes from.

4oil.blogspot.com/2010/07/real-reason-behind-bp-oil-spill-in-gulf.html
#153 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
hmmmm i was only referring to that one comment....dont start..
The concept still applies.
#154 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
kantwestaye posted links drummer and norse and vin all saw the threads.and the links were in the thread on here....i posted links from internet on the thread..you are confusing 2 issues..i said go to my wall to the thread,,the links were in that...it isnt rocket science.....and yes others did click on the link with all the articles as they posted links for you
*sigh*

You are becoming very dragon-like the way you ignore what is said earlier.  Why do you keep going back to things that have already been addressed?  I already said that kantwestaye posted some links.  No one else did, however.  Unless you count that broken link you provided.

I am not confusing anything.  The point is I shouldn't HAVE to go digging for some thread I was never involved in.  You posted the links there.  Wny not post therem in the other thread too?  Or even post a link to the other thread so I don't have to sort through all your posts to find it?  Why make it so very hard to support your take?  Like you said...  It isn't rocket science.  

I already did your work for you once when I did the search using the words you suggested to use.  It came up empty.  Why should I go on yet another one of your wild goose chases?  
#155 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
they didn aske me not did all the people in that particular thread because they read it for them selves....3 people posted links argued with you on your points that mine were valid.....you are just unreasonable as usual..you can say i dont bak up my facts..all you want.....many have posted exactly what i said in that previous thread and the one you supposedly couldnt find.
Some internet thread person sharing your opinion is just not good enough for me.  Sorry.  You may be easily swayed by that.  But I need something a bit more concrete.

I don't know what thread you were looking at, but in the one I was involved with, you provided one broken link to support your case.  Another person jumped in and provided a few.  And when asked to provide something that worked, you ignored it and came back with NOTHING. 

Your incredible avoidance of the issue speaks volumes.
#156 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
just because you were not involved in that prticular thread where i posted the links and others saw them does not make me a liar or unture..they were there..i am not going to argue this with you any more....the links were on that thread..i am not going to seach through a million hits once again to find them..you can...if i can find the htread i will gladly link you to the thread....dont sit here and ry to throw this on me because you didnt read the thread...we all did, and in the other thread you are referringto where you asked for facts many posted links for you...you have selected memory
True, the mere fact that I was not involved in the thread does not make you a liar or make what you said untrue.  What led me to think that was a possibility was that your lone link didn't work, the fact that you said it was obvious from a simple search that in reality yielded nothing, and then your incredible stubborness at NOT providing the info.  Those things add up to a good chance that you really have nothing.  Is it possible you do?  Sure.  But the odds are just not with it.

You aren't going to search through a "million" hits find your links, yet you expect ME to?   Sorry.  That just doesn't cut it either.

In your world "many" = ONE?  Wow.  Strange perspective. 

"Selective memory"?  I'm not the one who keeps repeating the same thing over and over that was already addressed as if it was never heard the first time.  Stop saying you provided links when asked.  It's false.  Stop saying multiple people provided links when I asked.  It's false.
#157 | 1556 days ago

what ever...i know that these people posted links on the who is responcible for the oil spill thread..and you knw it..you were not part of the joneses thread and there were links there.......  the aol search i sent you did work..you said it didnt work at your work,,but it worked at home..so YOU tell the truth..and yes i went through all the links once..im not doin it again when YOU can go find the threads your self.......it isnt false  ask drummer kantwestaye norse and vin who all posted links..you even commented on them and of course denied that any of the facts were true....go figure...grow up ,quit looking for fights with me just because you dont want to admit the links were there..it was the "who is responcible for the bp oil leak...and the other one was keeping up with the joneses...
#158 | 1556 days ago

Drummer99 wrote:
Hey ML, try the link below.

If this does indeed root back to Bush and Cheney's deregulating, then, that's just the facts! Look at the video as well. Seems to me, BP was being cheap and putting ppls lives in danger at the same time. Also, I usually don't look at MSNBC, and I'm sure you'll say they have an agenda, at the same time, you can't deny facts that are true, no matter where it comes from.

4oil.blogspot.com/2010/07/real-reason-behind-bp-oil-spill-in-gulf.html
Well, thanks for providing something.  Although I didn't ask YOU to.

However, I'd like something somewhat more legit than some blog that you or I could post.

Now the video.  The first bit was some lawyer dishing out his extremely biased case.  The guy was practically yelling at the host.  Could he be right?  Yes, he could.  But his crudentials (I looked them up) show him to be an extremist.  The fact that he had a radio show on Air America makes him about as trustworthy as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
There were two other bits in the video that did not get into the cause at all.  In fact, one of them was from Fox News that included the video poster's opinion of the network in general.

It seems that the causes of this thing will likely not be known until investigations are completed.
#159 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
True, the mere fact that I was not involved in the thread does not make you a liar or make what you said untrue.  What led me to think that was a possibility was that your lone link didn't work, the fact that you said it was obvious from a simple search that in reality yielded nothing, and then your incredible stubborness at NOT providing the info.  Those things add up to a good chance that you really have nothing.  Is it possible you do?  Sure.  But the odds are just not with it.

You aren't going to search through a "million" hits find your links, yet you expect ME to?   Sorry.  That just doesn't cut it either.

In your world "many" = ONE?  Wow.  Strange perspective. 

"Selective memory"?  I'm not the one who keeps repeating the same thing over and over that was already addressed as if it was never heard the first time.  Stop saying you provided links when asked.  It's false.  Stop saying multiple people provided links when I asked.  It's false.
again you didnt read wha ti wrote the links were from the internet on the subject of degerulation and responcibility.....not from someone on the internet......the thread was here and the link was on that......drummer put up a link again that backs exactly what i said that you seem to think are lies...... go find someone else to bully..caus eim done with you picking on me and calling me things that are not tru...i am far from aliar and i am credible....you are always looking for a fight on every thread you go to.....with everyone and anyone.....stop it...just stop it
#160 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
what ever...i know that these people posted links on the who is responcible for the oil spill thread..and you knw it..you were not part of the joneses thread and there were links there.......  the aol search i sent you did work..you said it didnt work at your work,,but it worked at home..so YOU tell the truth..and yes i went through all the links once..im not doin it again when YOU can go find the threads your self.......it isnt false  ask drummer kantwestaye norse and vin who all posted links..you even commented on them and of course denied that any of the facts were true....go figure...grow up ,quit looking for fights with me just because you dont want to admit the links were there..it was the "who is responcible for the bp oil leak...and the other one was keeping up with the joneses...
All I know is that Kant posted links.  And the one you did didn't work.  Fact.  I suspect you know it as well but are just too stubborn to admit you forgot, or made a mistake or whatever.

Again with the repeating...  I shouldn't HAVE to search for some other thread.  Especially when your credibility dropped to the point where I had doubts you put anything there to begin with.  It would have been easier for everyone if you just copied the same links in the thread I asked for links in, or a link to that particular thread.  As you said, it's not rocket science.

The AOL search you linked to DIDN'T work.  I even told you that back in that thread.  When confronted with that, you said just search for "XXXX" and there would be many many links that supported your take.  So I give you the benefit of the doubt and do the search.  I come up with next to nothing.   That is the facts of what happened.  Not your revisionist history.

Again you repeat yourself.  Why should I go looking for the needle in the haystack?  You supposedly knew where the links were.  I didn't.  It was just easier for all if you just made a link to them.  Yet you couldn't be bothered to do that.  This all leads me to believe you had nothing but what you wish was the case.

It is indeed false.  There was but one person who provided links.  And I examined them and spoke about them.  They were from kant.  I didn't deny any of their "facts" weren't true.  If I remember right, I questioned where the one that was relavent got it's data from.  The writer never supported his opinion with verifiable facts.

I need to grow up?  I'm not the one rehashing old arguments.  I'm not the one bringing up months old discussions.  You seem to be the one with the burr.  Not me.

Prove the links were there. (Apart from the one faulty one from you and the handful from Kant.)   What post # had them?  Can you at least tell me that?

Of course not.  All you need to support your take is because you said it was so.  Nothing else seems to be needed for you.
#161 | 1556 days ago

cuddles127017 wrote:
Sweetie! Sweetie! Sweetie!   The Democrat Examiner?   Give me a break.   That's Harry Reid's plan to smear her all he can.  I thought maybe there was a viedo of her saying something very extreme right.  I don't believe anything much the press tells me without checking it out.
OK  When i speak about the Tea Party, i am talking about the people not the speakers.   Yes there are all kinds of speakers from extreme right all the way to left.  There are all kinds of branches of the Tea Party.
The Tea Party is a movement of the people  not the speakers.  We will listen to most any of them that are running and then when we go into the voting booth, we make our own decision.  You know the speakers are gonna jump on the band wagon and say what they think the people want to hear but  New's Alert,   We the People are informed and not easily led down just any road.
she does say thing very much to the right  like get rid of your medicare and social security.....why help save city center(it employees 22,000 people btw,and harry reid saved those jobs and the city center)...she oposed saving it...she supports cutting education and school budgets and teacher jobs, cut taxes for the rich, all things she admits in her platform though i believe she changed her web site to take off social security and medicare so people wont see it but it is on tape several times and she said it at the gop meeting here in my county last month...... she is doing the smearing thus far in the race by posting false facts that harry reid is responcible for the loss of nevada economy and jobs and our enemployment rate..hello  that fell and has continued to since 2004....harry reid last i saw wasnt a republican who voted for deregulaton of that industry....nor was he president......,he has done nothing but eork for nevada seniors and others since he became our senator....and even when i voted straight republican i voted for reid.....he always takes calls listens will meet with you on issues,wrte letters for you and truly helps his constiguants....sharon angle is the scary one in this state....
#162 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
again you didnt read wha ti wrote the links were from the internet on the subject of degerulation and responcibility.....not from someone on the internet......the thread was here and the link was on that......drummer put up a link again that backs exactly what i said that you seem to think are lies...... go find someone else to bully..caus eim done with you picking on me and calling me things that are not tru...i am far from aliar and i am credible....you are always looking for a fight on every thread you go to.....with everyone and anyone.....stop it...just stop it
What links?  You didn't provide any.  And least any that worked.

If you are talking about the link a few posts up, that doesn't back anything.  It was just some internet schmoe spouting an opinion.  Not unlike what we all do here.

You rag on me and when I defend myself suddenly I am picking on you?  Really?  Take some responsibility and quit placing blame on others.  I never called you things that weren't true.  Not once.

Your posts, especially your recent ones, point to you either being a liar or someone who refuses to admit mistakes.  Only you know which is true.  As for being credible?  Your refusal to back up anything you say suggests otherwise.

Yeah...  I back up what I say and suddenly I'm looking for a fight.  You go back and bring up something you were cornered on to begin with, and I was the one looking for a fight.  Sure.

The idea that I am looking for fights "everywhere" is just not true.  In fact, I just recently had a disagreement with Janet that didn't degrade to this.  It was because we both respected each others take and didn't accuse the other of things that didn't happen or that weren't true.  Try writing posts that are respectful and this won't happen.  Even when the other person disagrees.
#163 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Well, thanks for providing something.  Although I didn't ask YOU to.

However, I'd like something somewhat more legit than some blog that you or I could post.

Now the video.  The first bit was some lawyer dishing out his extremely biased case.  The guy was practically yelling at the host.  Could he be right?  Yes, he could.  But his crudentials (I looked them up) show him to be an extremist.  The fact that he had a radio show on Air America makes him about as trustworthy as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
There were two other bits in the video that did not get into the cause at all.  In fact, one of them was from Fox News that included the video poster's opinion of the network in general.

It seems that the causes of this thing will likely not be known until investigations are completed.
this is exactly why i will not go back and to the leg work again..once was enough.you dont believe anything and the links we posted before were from the news and the govt links....you would argue toilet paper just becaus etha tis you...so tha tis exactly why i will not put my time into it again call me what you will..i know the truth as dos my creator,,and tha tis all the validation i need 
   thankyou drummer foor posting that.........nithng is good enough for him  he will argue anything......im done with this chat with him.....
#164 | 1556 days ago

Drummer99 wrote:
Hey ML, try the link below.

If this does indeed root back to Bush and Cheney's deregulating, then, that's just the facts! Look at the video as well. Seems to me, BP was being cheap and putting ppls lives in danger at the same time. Also, I usually don't look at MSNBC, and I'm sure you'll say they have an agenda, at the same time, you can't deny facts that are true, no matter where it comes from.

4oil.blogspot.com/2010/07/real-reason-behind-bp-oil-spill-in-gulf.html
thankyou soooo much for reposting..though of course he will find all negative in it......but YOU are a doll!!!!! thankyou thankyou! hugs
#165 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Well, thanks for providing something.  Although I didn't ask YOU to.

However, I'd like something somewhat more legit than some blog that you or I could post.

Now the video.  The first bit was some lawyer dishing out his extremely biased case.  The guy was practically yelling at the host.  Could he be right?  Yes, he could.  But his crudentials (I looked them up) show him to be an extremist.  The fact that he had a radio show on Air America makes him about as trustworthy as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
There were two other bits in the video that did not get into the cause at all.  In fact, one of them was from Fox News that included the video poster's opinion of the network in general.

It seems that the causes of this thing will likely not be known until investigations are completed.
If you think you're going to find a conservative opinion blaming Bush and Cheney or BP, you probably won't find it.
Its possible you might find someone moderate come up with something. Both Dem. and Rep. are going to argue their sides.
The conservative Rep. will say no, there was no deregulation, the liberal Dem. will say yes, it is the cause of the oil spill.

Chances are, it was a PART of the oil spill. Where there's smoke there's fire, and I believe deregulation played a part.
But, you don't want my opinion, you want Bush or Obama to call you personally and prove these things. Come on,
Consider that its possible.

That said, I'm not a basher. But, if Bush and Cheney caused this, it can't be denied, regardless.

Why are you calling Mims a liar? I remember her link.
#166 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
this is exactly why i will not go back and to the leg work again..once was enough.you dont believe anything and the links we posted before were from the news and the govt links....you would argue toilet paper just becaus etha tis you...so tha tis exactly why i will not put my time into it again call me what you will..i know the truth as dos my creator,,and tha tis all the validation i need 
   thankyou drummer foor posting that.........nithng is good enough for him  he will argue anything......im done with this chat with him.....
Once?  You didn't even do it ONCE.

I will believe it if it comes from more than one credible source.  You run around saying, "the sky is falling!" and I ask you how do you know that?  Someone else says, "Because Chicken Little over there SAYS it is!"  And you wonder why I doubt you.

What you need is something like, "Well, here is the report by the Euro Sky institute, and here is a list of qualified scientists in that field who will confirm it."  THEN I can buy it.

No, the one link you posted that didn't work was just a link to a search engine.  The few that kant posted, only one was a legit news link. 

Gee...  I guess I am some kind of argumentative guy because I don't blindly accept anything I wish were true just because some bozo wrote an interent blog about it.

Once again, what am I calling you?  You made this accusation and then...  And this is an OLD story....  DIDN'T BACK IT UP!!!

I know the truth as well.  But unlike you, I know the facts as well.

You know,if drummer tells you me he is giving me a $100 bill and then hands me a piece of paper that says "one huhndreed bux" written in crayon....  I would tell him that note is worthless.  Yet it seems you would agree with him that it was really worth $100 and that I was just arguing everything.

*That is an analogy.   One that works quite well in this situation if I do say so myself.
#167 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
thankyou soooo much for reposting..though of course he will find all negative in it......but YOU are a doll!!!!! thankyou thankyou! hugs
You are thanking him for doing what you didn't want to or couldn't do. 

Nice.
#168 | 1556 days ago

Drummer99 wrote:
If you think you're going to find a conservative opinion blaming Bush and Cheney or BP, you probably won't find it.
Its possible you might find someone moderate come up with something. Both Dem. and Rep. are going to argue their sides.
The conservative Rep. will say no, there was no deregulation, the liberal Dem. will say yes, it is the cause of the oil spill.

Chances are, it was a PART of the oil spill. Where there's smoke there's fire, and I believe deregulation played a part.
But, you don't want my opinion, you want Bush or Obama to call you personally and prove these things. Come on,
Consider that its possible.

That said, I'm not a basher. But, if Bush and Cheney caused this, it can't be denied, regardless.

Why are you calling Mims a liar? I remember her link.
I'm not looking for a slanted opinion from any side.  I am looking for someone to point out some verifiable FACTS.  And I don't care what faction provides them.

At this point, there is nothing to link the spill to any politician.  At this point, I am going with the spill being 100% because of BP.  Not because of Bush.  Not because of Chaney.  Not because of deregulation.  But because of BP.  The only fact that seemed to be verifiable was that BP had a history of violations.  Which points the finger even more at them.  To me, extending the blame beyond them is just petty partisan politics.

I remember her link as well.  It didn't work.  And I told her that in that thread.  She said she provided many links when I asked for them.  Which is 100% false.  Could she be mistaken?  Sure.  Could she not be remembering right?  Of course.  Both of those are human maladies and reasonable.  But you know what else is a possibility?  That she is outright lying about it.
#169 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I'm not looking for a slanted opinion from any side.  I am looking for someone to point out some verifiable FACTS.  And I don't care what faction provides them.

At this point, there is nothing to link the spill to any politician.  At this point, I am going with the spill being 100% because of BP.  Not because of Bush.  Not because of Chaney.  Not because of deregulation.  But because of BP.  The only fact that seemed to be verifiable was that BP had a history of violations.  Which points the finger even more at them.  To me, extending the blame beyond them is just petty partisan politics.

I remember her link as well.  It didn't work.  And I told her that in that thread.  She said she provided many links when I asked for them.  Which is 100% false.  Could she be mistaken?  Sure.  Could she not be remembering right?  Of course.  Both of those are human maladies and reasonable.  But you know what else is a possibility?  That she is outright lying about it.
Well, as usual, me and you agree to disagree. As for it being BP's fault, damn straight it was their fault. But, WHY?
Anyway, I'm not getting into a 25 post argument. No thanks. I have no desire to repeat myself, for 3 day marathon posts.
#170 | 1556 days ago

Drummer99 wrote:
Well, as usual, me and you agree to disagree. As for it being BP's fault, damn straight it was their fault. But, WHY?
Anyway, I'm not getting into a 25 post argument. No thanks. I have no desire to repeat myself, for 3 day marathon posts.
you are right i have to learn to just leave it too...
#171 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I'm not looking for a slanted opinion from any side.  I am looking for someone to point out some verifiable FACTS.  And I don't care what faction provides them.

At this point, there is nothing to link the spill to any politician.  At this point, I am going with the spill being 100% because of BP.  Not because of Bush.  Not because of Chaney.  Not because of deregulation.  But because of BP.  The only fact that seemed to be verifiable was that BP had a history of violations.  Which points the finger even more at them.  To me, extending the blame beyond them is just petty partisan politics.

I remember her link as well.  It didn't work.  And I told her that in that thread.  She said she provided many links when I asked for them.  Which is 100% false.  Could she be mistaken?  Sure.  Could she not be remembering right?  Of course.  Both of those are human maladies and reasonable.  But you know what else is a possibility?  That she is outright lying about it.
i did provide links once again on the joneses poll which must be gone.because i coudnt find it nor could drummer....couldnt be you dont remembe rthe links we all posted on the bpresponsibility spill thread ..could it?.....please do not vcallme a liar anymore....drummer just told you as well they were there..so stop it...you are attaking me now and i dont like it
#172 | 1556 days ago

Well we got another spill in the gulf now.  One that a tugboat cause.    Seems we will never run out of anything to argue talk about. 
errrrrr  
#173 | 1556 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
it was one question,  how in the world was it insulting and cruel/ if anything you saying it was :sad" norse put it up would be considered that. much more than a simple tactful question.....i merely asked you why it was sad?.. how am i judging you? i simply asked you a question.....
    that question in no way judged you and how you took it as such is beyond me.....
   and i believe you were the one who cslled me an idiot for no reason...which is a personal attack yet i let it go...,,but i ask a simple ,tactful question and you say i insult and judge you....wow
OH MY GOD!! Who was I laying a personal attack on? I don't remember calling you an idiot. If you feel there was a personal attack please point it out so I can set things straight.

As an example I say  "I am right, you are nothing more than a left wing extremist" would find that a little insulting in anyway?
#174 | 1556 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

cuddles127017 wrote:
Can't say i disagree with anything you have written and you are right anything we say we want for our country becomes very complicated because  there are so many different variables.  It is very complicated.  I think that is one of the smart things about our founding fathers, we each have a right to pursue our own happiness without government telling us how to do it.  I am for the individual  pursuing their own happiness and not some group or the government telling us or them how they have to do it.  The problem lies in government thinking they know what is best for the people and not themselves.  We are already the most generous country in the world and that because we are a Christian  nation.  I for one have faith in the people, the government doesn't.  Greed can only be taken care of by God.  Man cannot force other men into it.  That is communism.
A nation that will not promote fairness for all is doomed to failure.  If it means we must move from a pure capitalism to a social-capitalism to promote such fairness, then I am all for it.

“The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
--James Madison

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion”
--George Washington

This is yet another example of how our founders viewed the essence of organized religion and America as a nation.  George Washington was a devoutly religious man--a Christian, and despite the above quote, he did believe that Christianity held a great place of responsibility for us:

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.  Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that a national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
--George Washington

And if greed can only be taken care of by God, then why is America even a country?  One of the reasons for the American revolution was the greed of the English monarchy. 
#175 | 1556 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
You are thanking him for doing what you didn't want to or couldn't do. 

Nice.
OK, now this is a perfect example of your despicable nature as a person.  She thanked him because he found the link that she, herself knew about but wasn't able to find.  At least she produced the link in the first place.

You insult.  You talk down to people (which is funny to me because I know I'm not alone in reasoning that you're a complete idiot).  You provide no links to verifiable information that you hypocritically 'demand' of others.  You take the comments of others out of context, and manipulate essence of what is written to fit your own argument.

And before you demand proof, get off you lazy butt and do your own verification--there's a whole list above, and you can go back through a list of your own posts to threads.  No one is here to 'serve' you information--especially when you offer little of your own.  Why don't you provide a reference to something legitimate.  Why did others even have to go back and feed you references that they already produced?  You want to re-read something, you take the time to do it!
#176 | 1556 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
A nation that will not promote fairness for all is doomed to failure.  If it means we must move from a pure capitalism to a social-capitalism to promote such fairness, then I am all for it.

“The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
--James Madison

“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion”
--George Washington

This is yet another example of how our founders viewed the essence of organized religion and America as a nation.  George Washington was a devoutly religious man--a Christian, and despite the above quote, he did believe that Christianity held a great place of responsibility for us:

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.  Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that a national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
--George Washington

And if greed can only be taken care of by God, then why is America even a country?  One of the reasons for the American revolution was the greed of the English monarchy. 
What i was trying to say about God taking care of greed is God changes hearts, and if this country keeps trying to throw Him out then there is no hope.
errrrrr  
#177 | 1556 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
OH MY GOD!! Who was I laying a personal attack on? I don't remember calling you an idiot. If you feel there was a personal attack please point it out so I can set things straight.

As an example I say  "I am right, you are nothing more than a left wing extremist" would find that a little insulting in anyway?
you probably need re read the comment i wrote i said the teaprty is nothng more than right wing republicans..there was NOTHING in that comment cruel or insultingor disrespectful toward you..you owe me an apology
#178 | 1556 days ago

SEE   .. Like congress  and the Senate...  a simple bill/idea  turns into  something that NO ONE can make out what it was  in the beginning,,, with the attackments  and  add ons ..it gets  blurrrrrrrrred and the topic  is  lost... can we get back to the PARTY and what it is and  OH... who  is  leaving the ship....we  can all have a different pointof view...but we need not  BASH anyone  to voice our own views... be nice...or s i have lways  said.. FIGHT NICE... we are i hope all in this  for the GOOD of OUR NATION. 
#179 | 1556 days ago

cuddles127017 wrote:
What i was trying to say about God taking care of greed is God changes hearts, and if this country keeps trying to throw Him out then there is no hope.
but "god i"s something different to each of us..we all interpert it in different ways....that is the beauty of our great country..we CAN celebrate our god our own way.....we all do not have judeo-christian beliefs..we are a melting pot of beliefs and faiths..that is what america is..and we are so blessed to have that opportunity to embrace our faith and love for what we choose our "god "to be...but yes your words are right we do need a change in our hearts....
#180 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Speaking of extremist views....
#181 | 1556 days ago
vindog (+)

cuddles127017 wrote:
Sweetie! Sweetie! Sweetie!   The Democrat Examiner?   Give me a break.   That's Harry Reid's plan to smear her all he can.  I thought maybe there was a viedo of her saying something very extreme right.  I don't believe anything much the press tells me without checking it out.
OK  When i speak about the Tea Party, i am talking about the people not the speakers.   Yes there are all kinds of speakers from extreme right all the way to left.  There are all kinds of branches of the Tea Party.
The Tea Party is a movement of the people  not the speakers.  We will listen to most any of them that are running and then when we go into the voting booth, we make our own decision.  You know the speakers are gonna jump on the band wagon and say what they think the people want to hear but  New's Alert,   We the People are informed and not easily led down just any road.
THAT IS HER PLATFORM! And when you actually get into the voting booth, who are you gonna vote for? I'll bet you it's NOT the Democrat because when push comes to shove- YOU will NEVER vote for the Democrat no matter what and YOU have made that very clear in ALL of your posts. So people like this crazy woman WILL get the Tea Party vote. Period!
hmmmmmmmm  
#182 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
You are thanking him for doing what you didn't want to or couldn't do. 

Nice.
no i am thanking him because i couldnt find it..and he knows that my disease gets worse when i get stressed which you constantly do to me...that how neuro diseases work..stress makes them flare up...so he has a fast computer.i have a slw one...and he helped me..as he knew i had posted links....he ,unlike you is considerate and kind and was only backing up wha ti was and have said...of course there were many more....and the link i sent you was a google link with over a million pages..all you had to do is retype who is responcible for the BP oil leak.... .......many threads here dissapear after so many days as well or i would have found the lthreads and gladly shared.....i did a couple mnths back and you still didnt go to them...so....that is your problem if you didnt read the facts we all posted not mine
#183 | 1556 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

senorfred wrote:
SEE   .. Like congress  and the Senate...  a simple bill/idea  turns into  something that NO ONE can make out what it was  in the beginning,,, with the attackments  and  add ons ..it gets  blurrrrrrrrred and the topic  is  lost... can we get back to the PARTY and what it is and  OH... who  is  leaving the ship....we  can all have a different pointof view...but we need not  BASH anyone  to voice our own views... be nice...or s i have lways  said.. FIGHT NICE... we are i hope all in this  for the GOOD of OUR NATION. 
point well taken. Sometimes we just need a sane person to keep us on track and remind us we are all in the same boat.
#184 | 1556 days ago

BP's oil spill disaster outcome of US govt. deregulation
Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:13:50 GMT
Font size :
According to an AP poll recently, Americans have become just as dissatisfied with President Barack Obama's work on the Gulf oil spill as they were with his predecessor's handling of Hurricane Katrina, namely George Bush Jr.

Most Americans are angry about the government's slow response, with many doubting that Washington could really help them if they were a disaster victim.

Public attitudes have shifted dramatically as Americans, already reeling over a recession and angry at institutions of all types, from corporations to Congress, watched crude continuing to gush for more than two months now, into the oil spill, with no end in sight to the disaster, with some 300 million gallons of oil gushed into the sea.

The following is a rush transcript of Press TV's interview with Conn Hallinan, a columnist for Foreign Policy in Focus, in Berkley, California, and Larry Birns, Director of Council on Hemispheric Affairs in New York


Press TV: Have the American people been told the truth about the oil spill crisis?

Conn Hallinan: Well, I don't think so because in part we are not really absolutely certain exactly why it happened. There's been several explanations and this morning there was a long piece that one particular part failed. I don't think that they have been told the truth by either British Petroleum or the government in terms of how much oil has been released or what the long-term effects are going to be. And the long-term effects will be more than just oiled birds and sea tortoises. A lot of stuff is very toxic and it's very long-lasting.

So we are really talking about an immense area which has been subjected to incredibly toxic matter.

Press TV: Many Americans are asking: If Obama can't even handle a simple oil spill how can he handle a real crisis, or an attack on America?

Conn Hallinan: well, I do think that's finally creeping into the polls, you know. It's all the furies that have been released in your introduction to this. You know we have a crashing economy, it's like the economy is going back into recession. We have got a very unpopular war in Afghanistan, a war which is not over yet in Iraq; we have got a very tense situation with Iran, growing US isolation in places like Latin America, etc. There are any numbers of different things which are sort of piling up. As for the ability of the government to act in this case, you know, this is the case of chickens coming home to roost for years and years and not simply the Bush administration and the administrations before that.

You know, they took out all these rules. They basically got rid of regulations and they let these oil companies what they wanted to do. And this is the price. This is the consequence.

Press TV: Do you think one of reasons cited for President Obama's failure was when only on around Day 44 of the ecological tragedy, he then established a committee to investigate the root causes of the disaster? Where was he until then?

Conn Hallinan: Well, he has got a lot of criticism for establishing a committee, you know, why isn't he stopping the leak. You know the fact is that you made a pact with the devil. I mean, that's what you've done. You turned loose all these environmental regulations. You've given these companies basically a green light to do sort of what they wanted to do and now you are stuck. The companies can't stop the leak. Obama can't stop the leak. That leak could go on for two years. I think people need to be prepared for the fact that that leak may not be possible to actually stop. And they would be talking of approximately two billions barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

I think that Obama's style of doing things which is sort of not a lot of bombast. I think people are crazed right now and don't think that that's working very well. I'm not sure what he exactly would have done differently.

Press TV: There's a Web ad accusing President Obama of slow action on the Gulf oil spill crisis; you may have seen it by now; it hits at Obama for waiting 58 days to talk to BP executives face to face, even as he took time to play golf half a dozen times, raise money for Democratic candidates and hang out with celebrities, another telling sign of his slow response?

Larry Birns: well, I see this as an inevitable development where people never really thought much of Obama, in the first place, has been given a platform from which to work their negative feelings. I personally don't think this handling of the oil spill was either spectacularly brilliant or bad. I think it was an average executive performance. It brought into this many other agenda at the same time as the oil spill and it was discovered relatively late in the day that he was being relaxed and not doing the job very well.

I think that was a political spin that was given the issue at a certain point that mainly conservative Republicans felt that they could get some political mileage out of it.

Press TV: Why did the US government approve BP's drilling plan if they knew that BP had significantly more violations than all other oil companies drilling in the Gulf combined?

Larry Birns: well, I think that in general the Coast Guard did not have the level of confidence that it could supervise the drillers that it had to go to them and discover what was wrong. They didn't have a primary base to operate from as with this point of view that they didn't seem to have the necessary experience or wisdom and so the federal government went into this thing with one arm tied behind it. And BP was not particularly forthcoming in all that they knew because they were well aware that they were possible billions of dollars of lawsuits to take care of.

GHN/MB
 
 
Comment
No comment
Your Name
Your Comment
Enter the code shown
 
terms of use

x
Popular
  • last 24 hours
  • last week
  • last month
#185 | 1556 days ago

bp oil leak and deregulation - Search
#186 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
i did provide links once again on the joneses poll which must be gone.because i coudnt find it nor could drummer....couldnt be you dont remembe rthe links we all posted on the bpresponsibility spill thread ..could it?.....please do not vcallme a liar anymore....drummer just told you as well they were there..so stop it...you are attaking me now and i dont like it
All I know is that when I asked you for links, you failed to provide them.  When you suggested I do my own search, I did and came up with nothing.

Yes, it is possible I am not remembering.  But I don't think that likely.  I remember distinctly your link failing.  Which led to me doing the search myself.  

Drummer told me he remembered your link.  And so did I.  The link that didn't work.

No one likes to be attacked.  Not even me.  Which you have been doing ever since your dug up this old subject.
#187 | 1556 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
you probably need re read the comment i wrote i said the teaprty is nothng more than right wing republicans..there was NOTHING in that comment cruel or insultingor disrespectful toward you..you owe me an apology
Look Mims, Please, I made a statement. Asking me to re-read my own post in my opinion, is a sarcastic comment. None of what I'm saying here is in anger. Your comments about the Tea Party are very insulting to those of us who are not Republicans. I feel you've been unfair by lumping me into a group of right wing Republicans when I have no party affiliation.

All of this started over a post that didn't even pertain to you. I explained what I meant and the only person who should have complained is the Norseman. I think he made it very clear why he made that post. I understand, I have frustrations of my own. Please don't take offense to what I'm saying. This is a sincere and well meaning statement to you. I hope you understand that no apology will be forthcoming. None is need for either of us.
#188 | 1556 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
OK, now this is a perfect example of your despicable nature as a person.  She thanked him because he found the link that she, herself knew about but wasn't able to find.  At least she produced the link in the first place.

You insult.  You talk down to people (which is funny to me because I know I'm not alone in reasoning that you're a complete idiot).  You provide no links to verifiable information that you hypocritically 'demand' of others.  You take the comments of others out of context, and manipulate essence of what is written to fit your own argument.

And before you demand proof, get off you lazy butt and do your own verification--there's a whole list above, and you can go back through a list of your own posts to threads.  No one is here to 'serve' you information--especially when you offer little of your own.  Why don't you provide a reference to something legitimate.  Why did others even have to go back and feed you references that they already produced?  You want to re-read something, you take the time to do it!
This was "despicable" but her constant ragging on me (not to mention yours) isn't?

This is called a "double standard".

If you think I insulted her, please show me where I did.  Otherwise stay out of it. 

Here is an example of someone insulting another person...  From post  #175 written by NorseHeathen...  "I know I'm not alone in reasoning that you're a complete idiot."    That is a personal attack right there.  Plain as day.  Said so only because you felt your toes were stepped on by earlier in the thread for God only knows what reason.

I have taken NOTHING out of context.  You and a couple of others have made this claim but have never provided anything to show it.  All you have is your word.  Funny how the only time it ever pops up is when you have a disagreement. 

You take the comments of others out of context, and manipulate essence of what is written to fit your own argument.

Kind of like what you did in your post #100.

There is my verifacation.  I just referenced where you did the very thing you accuse me of doing.  It was backed up.  You write like you are a learned individual.  Learn that.

You seem to be ignorant to the thread Redhead was referring to.  In it, I was just asking for her to provide information for what led her to her conclusion.  I wasn't making a comment of my own.  There was no statement from me to provide references for to begin with.  You would know that if you kept up.

The thread was weeks old.  Why she decided to dig it up again...  You have to ask her that.

I will thank you to stay out of it unless you wish to contribute something constructive.
#189 | 1556 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
it was one question,  how in the world was it insulting and cruel/ if anything you saying it was :sad" norse put it up would be considered that. much more than a simple tactful question.....i merely asked you why it was sad?.. how am i judging you? i simply asked you a question.....
    that question in no way judged you and how you took it as such is beyond me.....
   and i believe you were the one who cslled me an idiot for no reason...which is a personal attack yet i let it go...,,but i ask a simple ,tactful question and you say i insult and judge you....wow
Please Mims point out where I called you an idiot. Not being a smart a** or anything,  just wasn't sure if I actually said that. Now would be a good time to tell me to re-read my post. I might need you to put my finger on it for me.
#190 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
no i am thanking him because i couldnt find it..and he knows that my disease gets worse when i get stressed which you constantly do to me...that how neuro diseases work..stress makes them flare up...so he has a fast computer.i have a slw one...and he helped me..as he knew i had posted links....he ,unlike you is considerate and kind and was only backing up wha ti was and have said...of course there were many more....and the link i sent you was a google link with over a million pages..all you had to do is retype who is responcible for the BP oil leak.... .......many threads here dissapear after so many days as well or i would have found the lthreads and gladly shared.....i did a couple mnths back and you still didnt go to them...so....that is your problem if you didnt read the facts we all posted not mine
You say you couldn't find it...  Yet back in the thread in question you said it was easily found.  That it was "everywhere".

Don't blame me for the stress.  You were the one who opened up this Pandora's Box.  It doesn't matter how fast your computer is.  Especially if it were true when you said the evidence is "everywhere".

On the contrary.  All who know me know how considerate and kind I am.  More so than most.  Especially here.  Too many people here take things personally and respond with personal attacks.  Like calling people "idiots".  (and you know who you are)
You don't know me.  All you know is the person you bashed on for the last few days.

Why do you keep repeating the BS when you know I already addressed it?  The search provided tons of links, yes.  But that doesn't mean the ALL support your position.  In fact, when I did your search for you, there was one that hinted at the possibility.  Just one in the first 6 pages of results.  I guess your tactic is to repeat the same thing over and over again and hope it will become the truth.

I seriously doubt you would have put the links up.  You didn't weeks ago when I first asked you to.  There is no reason to think you changed your mind and would do it now.

Again with the lie/mistake/intentional avoidence.  You NEVER posted anything when I asked you for something.  Ever.  You aren't fooling anyone by repeating it over and over and over.  

Look, It really doesn't matter that you had nothing verifiable to back it up.  Just say your conclusion was a "gut feeling" or something and that would be that.  Why the charade?
#191 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
All I know is that when I asked you for links, you failed to provide them.  When you suggested I do my own search, I did and came up with nothing.

Yes, it is possible I am not remembering.  But I don't think that likely.  I remember distinctly your link failing.  Which led to me doing the search myself.  

Drummer told me he remembered your link.  And so did I.  The link that didn't work.

No one likes to be attacked.  Not even me.  Which you have been doing ever since your dug up this old subject.
drummer remembers links he read  and ones that didnt work....maybe it didnt work becaus eit was an aol link..as is this one... but you certainly could have done what i did.....and there were many other links as well.you would argue any fact put in front of you unless you agree with it.....is boils down to that...but calling me a liar and everything else you said.is untrue and certainly YUR opinion
#192 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
BP's oil spill disaster outcome of US govt. deregulation
Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:13:50 GMT
Font size :
According to an AP poll recently, Americans have become just as dissatisfied with President Barack Obama's work on the Gulf oil spill as they were with his predecessor's handling of Hurricane Katrina, namely George Bush Jr.

Most Americans are angry about the government's slow response, with many doubting that Washington could really help them if they were a disaster victim.

Public attitudes have shifted dramatically as Americans, already reeling over a recession and angry at institutions of all types, from corporations to Congress, watched crude continuing to gush for more than two months now, into the oil spill, with no end in sight to the disaster, with some 300 million gallons of oil gushed into the sea.

The following is a rush transcript of Press TV's interview with Conn Hallinan, a columnist for Foreign Policy in Focus, in Berkley, California, and Larry Birns, Director of Council on Hemispheric Affairs in New York


Press TV: Have the American people been told the truth about the oil spill crisis?

Conn Hallinan: Well, I don't think so because in part we are not really absolutely certain exactly why it happened. There's been several explanations and this morning there was a long piece that one particular part failed. I don't think that they have been told the truth by either British Petroleum or the government in terms of how much oil has been released or what the long-term effects are going to be. And the long-term effects will be more than just oiled birds and sea tortoises. A lot of stuff is very toxic and it's very long-lasting.

So we are really talking about an immense area which has been subjected to incredibly toxic matter.

Press TV: Many Americans are asking: If Obama can't even handle a simple oil spill how can he handle a real crisis, or an attack on America?

Conn Hallinan: well, I do think that's finally creeping into the polls, you know. It's all the furies that have been released in your introduction to this. You know we have a crashing economy, it's like the economy is going back into recession. We have got a very unpopular war in Afghanistan, a war which is not over yet in Iraq; we have got a very tense situation with Iran, growing US isolation in places like Latin America, etc. There are any numbers of different things which are sort of piling up. As for the ability of the government to act in this case, you know, this is the case of chickens coming home to roost for years and years and not simply the Bush administration and the administrations before that.

You know, they took out all these rules. They basically got rid of regulations and they let these oil companies what they wanted to do. And this is the price. This is the consequence.

Press TV: Do you think one of reasons cited for President Obama's failure was when only on around Day 44 of the ecological tragedy, he then established a committee to investigate the root causes of the disaster? Where was he until then?

Conn Hallinan: Well, he has got a lot of criticism for establishing a committee, you know, why isn't he stopping the leak. You know the fact is that you made a pact with the devil. I mean, that's what you've done. You turned loose all these environmental regulations. You've given these companies basically a green light to do sort of what they wanted to do and now you are stuck. The companies can't stop the leak. Obama can't stop the leak. That leak could go on for two years. I think people need to be prepared for the fact that that leak may not be possible to actually stop. And they would be talking of approximately two billions barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

I think that Obama's style of doing things which is sort of not a lot of bombast. I think people are crazed right now and don't think that that's working very well. I'm not sure what he exactly would have done differently.

Press TV: There's a Web ad accusing President Obama of slow action on the Gulf oil spill crisis; you may have seen it by now; it hits at Obama for waiting 58 days to talk to BP executives face to face, even as he took time to play golf half a dozen times, raise money for Democratic candidates and hang out with celebrities, another telling sign of his slow response?

Larry Birns: well, I see this as an inevitable development where people never really thought much of Obama, in the first place, has been given a platform from which to work their negative feelings. I personally don't think this handling of the oil spill was either spectacularly brilliant or bad. I think it was an average executive performance. It brought into this many other agenda at the same time as the oil spill and it was discovered relatively late in the day that he was being relaxed and not doing the job very well.

I think that was a political spin that was given the issue at a certain point that mainly conservative Republicans felt that they could get some political mileage out of it.

Press TV: Why did the US government approve BP's drilling plan if they knew that BP had significantly more violations than all other oil companies drilling in the Gulf combined?

Larry Birns: well, I think that in general the Coast Guard did not have the level of confidence that it could supervise the drillers that it had to go to them and discover what was wrong. They didn't have a primary base to operate from as with this point of view that they didn't seem to have the necessary experience or wisdom and so the federal government went into this thing with one arm tied behind it. And BP was not particularly forthcoming in all that they knew because they were well aware that they were possible billions of dollars of lawsuits to take care of.

GHN/MB
 
 
Comment
No comment
Your Name
Your Comment
Enter the code shown
 
terms of use

x
Popular
  • last 24 hours
  • last week
  • last month
Well, that's one.  And look how long it took to get that.  Was that so hard?

I would, however, like to know where that came from.  It is interesting but it still doesn't explain how things went from A to B. 
#193 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote: And this link worked, unlike your other one.

I don't have time right now to pour through much of it, but on the first page there was but one potentially worthwhile link on the matter.  Unfortunately it was to a columnist.  I'll read his column later when I have more time.  Hopefully it will explain reasonably how they figure an oil leak was caused by politicians.
#194 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
drummer remembers links he read  and ones that didnt work....maybe it didnt work becaus eit was an aol link..as is this one... but you certainly could have done what i did.....and there were many other links as well.you would argue any fact put in front of you unless you agree with it.....is boils down to that...but calling me a liar and everything else you said.is untrue and certainly YUR opinion
All he said was he remembers "the link".  And I did too.

I did do what you asked.  Do my own search.  Are you forgetting the many times I told you this or are you ignoring it?  
#195 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
This was "despicable" but her constant ragging on me (not to mention yours) isn't?

This is called a "double standard".

If you think I insulted her, please show me where I did.  Otherwise stay out of it. 

Here is an example of someone insulting another person...  From post  #175 written by NorseHeathen...  "I know I'm not alone in reasoning that you're a complete idiot."    That is a personal attack right there.  Plain as day.  Said so only because you felt your toes were stepped on by earlier in the thread for God only knows what reason.

I have taken NOTHING out of context.  You and a couple of others have made this claim but have never provided anything to show it.  All you have is your word.  Funny how the only time it ever pops up is when you have a disagreement. 

You take the comments of others out of context, and manipulate essence of what is written to fit your own argument.

Kind of like what you did in your post #100.

There is my verifacation.  I just referenced where you did the very thing you accuse me of doing.  It was backed up.  You write like you are a learned individual.  Learn that.

You seem to be ignorant to the thread Redhead was referring to.  In it, I was just asking for her to provide information for what led her to her conclusion.  I wasn't making a comment of my own.  There was no statement from me to provide references for to begin with.  You would know that if you kept up.

The thread was weeks old.  Why she decided to dig it up again...  You have to ask her that.

I will thank you to stay out of it unless you wish to contribute something constructive.
sir norse most certaily was aware of both threads because he contributed links as well on both the joneses and who is responsible of the bp spill...many shared links on both threads...the threads must have expired thus i couldnt find them, not do i know properly how to search them .other than going back through 2 months of comments.....Drummer found one of the lnks and posted it...being a kind individual.willing to help all people......norse read and posted and thus has every right to speak to tis issue....
    yes there were references..you asked for "proof that the government was responsible.and we all posted links that proved that not only was deregulation a major part..it showed how it trickled down to cheneys private ,closed doors meetings with the oil industry,his involvement with haliburton, osha, and other government agencies ,who by the way all are blaming the other guy we gave you as much info as we could.and proved it..yet YOU chose to argu the facts,because you didnt agree or for god only kows why......as i have said many times..why are we the only ountry tht doesnt demand reserve wells and safety precautions as spoke about in the link drummer put up........we dodnt because the oil industry is in too many politicians pockets..so they all turned the other cheek..... regulation and the trickle down fall out from that is exactly why the oil rig exploded,,,if we ensured proper safety measures in the first place like every other country,we wouldnt ever have had to have this converse......
     
#196 | 1556 days ago

cuddles127017 wrote:
Can't say i disagree with anything you have written and you are right anything we say we want for our country becomes very complicated because  there are so many different variables.  It is very complicated.  I think that is one of the smart things about our founding fathers, we each have a right to pursue our own happiness without government telling us how to do it.  I am for the individual  pursuing their own happiness and not some group or the government telling us or them how they have to do it.  The problem lies in government thinking they know what is best for the people and not themselves.  We are already the most generous country in the world and that because we are a Christian  nation.  I for one have faith in the people, the government doesn't.  Greed can only be taken care of by God.  Man cannot force other men into it.  That is communism.
government is for the good of all people..wel that is the theory behind it.....whenyou are dealing with millions of people you need governing......there are rules,like we have to pay our taxes obey the laws..et al......that is the government telling us what to do...they make guidelines..
  im not sure where this administration or any administration is saying we dont have the right to happiness or where  they are  trying to tell us how to do it?... or forcing their points of the persuit of happiness on us? im a bit confused on this?
#197 | 1556 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Look Mims, Please, I made a statement. Asking me to re-read my own post in my opinion, is a sarcastic comment. None of what I'm saying here is in anger. Your comments about the Tea Party are very insulting to those of us who are not Republicans. I feel you've been unfair by lumping me into a group of right wing Republicans when I have no party affiliation.

All of this started over a post that didn't even pertain to you. I explained what I meant and the only person who should have complained is the Norseman. I think he made it very clear why he made that post. I understand, I have frustrations of my own. Please don't take offense to what I'm saying. This is a sincere and well meaning statement to you. I hope you understand that no apology will be forthcoming. None is need for either of us.
hd i said you,in the statemnt referring to the tea prty then maybe your comment would hold water...all i did was askyou a simple question,"why you thouht norse posting what he did sad,and said he was right the tea party is very right wing republicians...i didt say you were, or attack you in any way...yet you attacked me by saying i was cruel and insulting  et al.... this is a thread.....people read the comments and make comments back...just as you do as well.......if you post something on a thread publicaly we all may comment on it......norses post wasnt aimed at you ,,it was in generl, yet you commented....i simply asked you a very simple question and you took it personally....and god knows i can not figure out how or why?
     i take no offense what so ever to this post........or most your posts.i feel they are smart and great points of view..I do take offense however when you tell me i am cruel and insulting,and what elver else you called me in that comment,for doing nothing but asking you a question?
#198 | 1556 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
Please Mims point out where I called you an idiot. Not being a smart a** or anything,  just wasn't sure if I actually said that. Now would be a good time to tell me to re-read my post. I might need you to put my finger on it for me.
i will have to look to see what thread it was in..and if it has expired or not......however i shall look....
#199 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
All he said was he remembers "the link".  And I did too.

I did do what you asked.  Do my own search.  Are you forgetting the many times I told you this or are you ignoring it?  
i remember well you said the aol search link didnt work.....the links norse is referring to is that one plus many others..he remembrs the links because hewas active in the threads and read them and the links and posted links himself......there was tons of great information in all the links....
#200 | 1556 days ago

Pop_Tart wrote:
point well taken. Sometimes we just need a sane person to keep us on track and remind us we are all in the same boat.
yes but sometime i fell that the captain is asleep at the wheel..

We the People... united in this to live and hope to bring a better good to all mankind... just got to keep an eye on who has the hand in the cookie jar...
#201 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
And this link worked, unlike your other one.

I don't have time right now to pour through much of it, but on the first page there was but one potentially worthwhile link on the matter.  Unfortunately it was to a columnist.  I'll read his column later when I have more time.  Hopefully it will explain reasonably how they figure an oil leak was caused by politicians.
well the other link was exactly the same as this seach link.you said it didnt work and you would try it at home..i dont know maybe they expireafter a certain amount of time..but the point is..you certainly could have found millions of articles from government links and such...this journalist based his information off of government findinfs..it isnt his opinion....i actually heard this same story on world news tonight....as well........just as they reported the other 30 deaths due to carelessness on the oil rigs,problems that were reported and ignored and cost people their lives....it was buried so deep that it took this administration many months to find it......bp was fined next to nothing for these safety issues, and people lost their lives ....and of cours ehad no law suit because the facts were hid,in paper work..why do you think obama fired the man in charge of that agengy and replaced him? because he didnt do his job and covered up many things.....
#202 | 1556 days ago

ML31 wrote:
You say you couldn't find it...  Yet back in the thread in question you said it was easily found.  That it was "everywhere".

Don't blame me for the stress.  You were the one who opened up this Pandora's Box.  It doesn't matter how fast your computer is.  Especially if it were true when you said the evidence is "everywhere".

On the contrary.  All who know me know how considerate and kind I am.  More so than most.  Especially here.  Too many people here take things personally and respond with personal attacks.  Like calling people "idiots".  (and you know who you are)
You don't know me.  All you know is the person you bashed on for the last few days.

Why do you keep repeating the BS when you know I already addressed it?  The search provided tons of links, yes.  But that doesn't mean the ALL support your position.  In fact, when I did your search for you, there was one that hinted at the possibility.  Just one in the first 6 pages of results.  I guess your tactic is to repeat the same thing over and over again and hope it will become the truth.

I seriously doubt you would have put the links up.  You didn't weeks ago when I first asked you to.  There is no reason to think you changed your mind and would do it now.

Again with the lie/mistake/intentional avoidence.  You NEVER posted anything when I asked you for something.  Ever.  You aren't fooling anyone by repeating it over and over and over.  

Look, It really doesn't matter that you had nothing verifiable to back it up.  Just say your conclusion was a "gut feeling" or something and that would be that.  Why the charade?
oh my god....i said at the time.it was easily found..becasue it was on my wall from commenting and all you had to do a tthat time was click on my wall and the thread......now it isnt easy because 2 months have gone by....and the thread is no where i can find it.......had you read what i said   then you would have know this....the rest of your sttement is ridicilous and i am not addressing it...i did everthing you asked and this new link i posted is many points of views so red what you want......i dont care...i posted it before others posted thigns before and YOU didnt bother to look past the link you insisted dint work...
#203 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
sir norse most certaily was aware of both threads because he contributed links as well on both the joneses and who is responsible of the bp spill...many shared links on both threads...the threads must have expired thus i couldnt find them, not do i know properly how to search them .other than going back through 2 months of comments.....Drummer found one of the lnks and posted it...being a kind individual.willing to help all people......norse read and posted and thus has every right to speak to tis issue....
    yes there were references..you asked for "proof that the government was responsible.and we all posted links that proved that not only was deregulation a major part..it showed how it trickled down to cheneys private ,closed doors meetings with the oil industry,his involvement with haliburton, osha, and other government agencies ,who by the way all are blaming the other guy we gave you as much info as we could.and proved it..yet YOU chose to argu the facts,because you didnt agree or for god only kows why......as i have said many times..why are we the only ountry tht doesnt demand reserve wells and safety precautions as spoke about in the link drummer put up........we dodnt because the oil industry is in too many politicians pockets..so they all turned the other cheek..... regulation and the trickle down fall out from that is exactly why the oil rig exploded,,,if we ensured proper safety measures in the first place like every other country,we wouldnt ever have had to have this converse......
     
Based on what he said, he was certainly not aware of what was going on there.  In spite of even contributing to the one I was involved in.

According to your own comments, you shouldn't HAVE to find the threads.  All you need is to do a search and you will be covered with credible links.  Right?

There is certainly nothing stopping anyone from speaking out on the issue.  Normally I welcome divergent comments.  But in his case, all he did was throw gasoline on the fire and offered nothing constructive.  So I asked him to cease unless it was.  It's up to him if he wishes to follow through or not.  

Something tells me you wouldn't think Drummer was as "kind" if he provided a link that showed your take to be incorrect.

Who is "we all"?  All you did was post the results from an AOL search.  And Kant provided links that were either not credible or inconclusive.  That's it.  That was all i got from my request.  We went over all this already.  Why do you continue to ignore all this?  That I can promise you I do not understand.  Do you enjoy harassing others here?  What's your deal?
#204 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
i remember well you said the aol search link didnt work.....the links norse is referring to is that one plus many others..he remembrs the links because hewas active in the threads and read them and the links and posted links himself......there was tons of great information in all the links....
He said "link".  Singular.  No 'S'.  Not plural.  Meaning, the ONE link.  The one that I told you did not work.  

You know, I think you really need to let this one go.
#205 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
well the other link was exactly the same as this seach link.you said it didnt work and you would try it at home..i dont know maybe they expireafter a certain amount of time..but the point is..you certainly could have found millions of articles from government links and such...this journalist based his information off of government findinfs..it isnt his opinion....i actually heard this same story on world news tonight....as well........just as they reported the other 30 deaths due to carelessness on the oil rigs,problems that were reported and ignored and cost people their lives....it was buried so deep that it took this administration many months to find it......bp was fined next to nothing for these safety issues, and people lost their lives ....and of cours ehad no law suit because the facts were hid,in paper work..why do you think obama fired the man in charge of that agengy and replaced him? because he didnt do his job and covered up many things.....
The problem with columnists is that they write opinion.  And unlike reporters, they often don't find themselves bothered with actual facts.

I read the column.  He does not explain how things went from A to B.  He just offered up his opinion as I feared he would.

In the first few pages of results, there was but one worthwhile report.  It was from Reuters.  It spoke of a criminal probe being launched.   It was filled with a lot of factual information.  But nothing about how politicians caused the leak.  The one I am referring to is this one.

I'm not sure how many more pages I should though since it is difficult to find any real facts on the matter. 
I'm tired of searching through search results.  Unless I come across anything in the future I am sticking with my thinking that the spill was 100% BP's fault.  Not any politican's, not any policy.  But BP and ONLY BP.  
#206 | 1556 days ago

Onegoodredhead2 wrote:
oh my god....i said at the time.it was easily found..becasue it was on my wall from commenting and all you had to do a tthat time was click on my wall and the thread......now it isnt easy because 2 months have gone by....and the thread is no where i can find it.......had you read what i said   then you would have know this....the rest of your sttement is ridicilous and i am not addressing it...i did everthing you asked and this new link i posted is many points of views so red what you want......i dont care...i posted it before others posted thigns before and YOU didnt bother to look past the link you insisted dint work...
At the time, you didn't say crap about your wall.  You did bring up some other thread but I had no desire to comb through that.  All you had to do at the time was copy and paste the links.  But you didn't do that.  When you said "easily found" you were referring to the results that backed your take from a search engine.  Don't tell me I don't read what you write.  I do.  Please put a lid on that one.

Nothing in my post was ridiculous.  It was 100% true.  Weather you wish to acknowledge it or not.

All I asked was what did you have that led you to your conclusion.  And you never complied.  The best you did was post another search engine result.  Sorry.  I was willing to look through it before.  Again, you forgot/ignored/lied about it.  When your link didn't work, I did the search for you.  It yielded nothing substantial.

The fact is, when asked, you failed to provide.  I get it.  You win.  I know better now.  From now on I will never ask you for what you had that brought you to your conclusions.  I know you will never provide.  Sadly, that puts you in the majority here.
#207 | 1556 days ago
Pop_Tart (+)

senorfred wrote:
yes but sometime i fell that the captain is asleep at the wheel..

We the People... united in this to live and hope to bring a better good to all mankind... just got to keep an eye on who has the hand in the cookie jar...
You might want to poke the Captain, I think he's dead! Lol, Too many hands in the cookie jar to watch em all.
#208 | 1556 days ago

vindog wrote:
It does somewhat, however those with "Conservative Views" are NOT center right. Conservatism is FAR RIGHT and ALWAYS has been- so Mims IS right in what she said. Maybe not ALL are "extremists" per-say but Conservatives are VERY FAR right and have ALWAYS been the base of the Republican Party. So in reality, the Tea Party is nothing more than than the "Conservative Faction" of the Republican Party and nothing more or "new" to the political scene. Candidates like Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney have ALWAYS been Right Wing Conservatives and NOW are somehow something different? LOL  They are the SAME political figures they were in 2008 and their views are VERY Extreme Right Wing philosophies that have been around forever and it's nothing new at all. The problem with the Tea Party (IMHO) is that they ARE NOT towards the "center" of the political spectrum- they ARE far right and the majority of this Country is more towards the center- that's a fact. Hell I would have voted for John McCain had he not chosen an Extremist to be his running mate- but I will NOT allow a person to control MY COUNTRY that has views such as Sarah Palin does- I enjoy my FREEDOMS way too much than to allow a person with a Religious Agenda controlling my everyday life and Palin represents those views AND IS a Tea Party leader!  The rest of the "Tea Party Agenda" is nothing but window dressing to disguise the TRUE agenda behind the Party!
i was one of those "on the fence voters as wel...Once John Mc Cain Picked Palin,he lost my vote....We vety well would have won the presidency had he made a Good choice for his running mate.... i mho i think most indies voted obama because of mc cains choice....
#209 | 1555 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

cuddles127017 wrote:
What i was trying to say about God taking care of greed is God changes hearts, and if this country keeps trying to throw Him out then there is no hope.
In that sense, I hope you are right.  Unfortunately my faith in people is waining to a very disheartening level.

One thing this country needs is a re-committment to virtue.  If people would look beyond themselves, even on the smallest level beginning with one's family, neighborhood, etc.  Things could get better.  Unfortunately, selfishness is now the modus operandi of the majority of society, and if it takes laws to ensure we promote fairness, then I believe that is what is needed to be done.  That too is a double edged sword as (like society) the establishment of law in today's political forum is accomplished too oft times with ulterior motives in the guise of something supposably beneficial.

Thanks for you comments.  I think some get so wrapped up in the more technical aspects of what is going on that they forget the social and individual considerations.
#210 | 1555 days ago
vindog (+)

(Edited by vindog)
cuddles127017 wrote:
Sweetie! Sweetie! Sweetie!   The Democrat Examiner?   Give me a break.   That's Harry Reid's plan to smear her all he can.  I thought maybe there was a viedo of her saying something very extreme right.  I don't believe anything much the press tells me without checking it out.
OK  When i speak about the Tea Party, i am talking about the people not the speakers.   Yes there are all kinds of speakers from extreme right all the way to left.  There are all kinds of branches of the Tea Party.
The Tea Party is a movement of the people  not the speakers.  We will listen to most any of them that are running and then when we go into the voting booth, we make our own decision.  You know the speakers are gonna jump on the band wagon and say what they think the people want to hear but  New's Alert,   We the People are informed and not easily led down just any road.
Heres a video for you to watch on Sharron Angle (TEA PARTY LEADER)- now tell me she isn't a Radical Right Winger and WRONG for Nevada!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UvVVDKy9_M&NR=1&feature=fvwp    And you have this one that PROVES she has a Radical Religious agenda that she wants to force down Americans throats instead of allowing us to exercise our 1st Amendment rights....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu2s8gKIu6c&feature=player_embedded
hmmmmmmmm  
#211 | 1555 days ago

YouTube - "Extreme & Out-of-Step"