[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Racists occur in every party, but only the predominately white (GOP/Tea Party) get labeled as racists by the main stream media.
Why?[/quote]
Primarily because it is a commonly used and often times effective political tactic. For soem reason, people still buy into such nonsense.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
No pitbull its not a collection of misfits, like I stated it is an Organic movement with no true leadership at the top. We have an agenda to restore this country from going into a socialist state as is currently heading into.
It will organize and when you say that the republicans and dems will destroy you are wrong the opposite will happen. The center and the right will overcome both. See what you fail to realize is that most Americans agree with our principles. The wishy washy left are being bought at the moment, when the money runs out…then they will see what wrong they have committed.
Also your passive-aggressive statements dont pass by me, just state what you want too. Quit tip-toeing and act like a Man.
Also I hate LULAC and La Raza, I donated my time to them for a year and saw how fucking corrupt they are here in Dallas. Its such a disgrace the throw 1k scholarship but they pocket the rest of the gov. grants through landscaping or other pet projects to friends.
Once the money of the left is dry and they are exposed which is unfolding slowly but surely, things will change. [/quote]
You know , I hope you are right. Right now they have some healthy opponents ,and we have a large percentage of Americans that are incapable of original thought.Most of the people are just like the ones on this board , It is OK to kill thousands of people , but if you kill a Zygote then you are the lowest of lows.
One of the attractive points to the tea party , which is fiscal conservative absent the social trappings of the MORAL MAJORITY. I believe I was wrong. ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION. Sounds like the Republican party on steroids . Did not touch the military, did not touch the war on drugs . If they are going to be different I wish they would act it [/quote]
It is my impression that they are primarily against FEDERAL tax dollars going to pay for abortions, and believe R v W wrongly expanded the constitution.
Thats just an impression, and I’m not evaluating it.
But interestingly I started reading a book called Freakanomics today and the first chapter is talking about how abortions cut projected homocides to about 30% of projected levels in the years following Roe v Wade, because abortions tended to abort children who were in “groups” that were statistically more likely to produce murderers.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Why is it ok to be racist towards white people[/quote]
It isn’t. That’s a shitty story about your grandma, those people were fucktards.[/quote]
Again, I am not trying to sound repetitive here…but a micro portion of the Tea party is racist…so the whole group gets the label.
A part of the Democratic party voting block (some minorities) are just as racist…yet the whole party gets a free pass…why? [/quote]
The word micro is where we disagree.[/quote]
The Tea Party IS a micro party…so if you have 1,000,000 members and 1000 are racist…that is a micro not a macro situation nationwide.
You have 100,000,000 minorities… if the same percentages hold (and I imagine they are close) that is a LOT of Democratic supporting racists.[/quote]
No. Proportions tell us more about political and social groups than do absolute values. If you were to lay out the proportions of overtly racist constituents I believe that the Tea Party would beat most major political movements in America today.
If the Republican party is made up of 100 million people and two are murderers, I wouldn’t say it’s a party of murderers. If I start a club with one other guy and we are both murderers, it’s a different story isn’t it? Even though the absolute numbers are identical.[/quote]
OK again, fair enough…you think that a large group of (mostly not all white) people that believe in extreme fiscal responsibility and a return to traditional values has a large racist component. Because of a few videos and reports from (I’m sure highly conservative lol) media.
I have just as many videos and articles of minorities acting in a racist manner, but Dems never get the label…thats my point. [/quote]
I have repeatedly said that the fiscal conservatives in the movement don’t deserve criticism. The racist elements do, and by many accounts they are substantial.
yes, these accounts come from the media–but I’m talking about respectable media. The article I quoted earlier was from the Wash. Post. I get my news from the major sources: the BBC, the New York Times, the WSJ, the CSM, etc. In their editorial pages all of these have a decidedly ideological slant, but in the reporting of news they are nowhere near as biased as people like to depict them. Facts are facts. When the New York Times gets something wrong, which they inevitably will, they make the correction. However, take a look at the corrections page…“we misstated the number of brazieres Ms. Hilton buys in a given week”, etc. These are not major ideological problems. News is news and in reputable sources of it in America are about as trustworthy as we can expect.[/quote]
Would you categorize the racist elements of the Democratic Party (La Raza, Mecha, LULAC, MALDEF, Black Panther Party, etc) equally as those you deem to be racist in the Tea Party?[/quote]
Yes. I suspect that they comprise a smaller percentage of the whole though and they certainly are much further from the levels of power within their party as a whole than the racist elements of the Tea Party are.
Mertdawg…I have read freakonomics…good book… A little story. I once asked my barber and this is no bullshit story. I asked why did crime go down and he answered as a joke because of abortions. I was aghast this is a man from the ghetto and he answered what the book said. He had no idea of the truth he was speaking.
So we can all agree that all groups and parties either show signs of racism or scream racism, that being a common denominator, why is it even being brought up? Can’t we politically (the same way one could mathematically) cancel that shit out?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
So we can all agree that all groups and parties either show signs of racism or scream racism, that being a common denominator, why is it even being brought up? Can’t we politically (the same way one could mathematically) cancel that shit out?[/quote]
I think the public is doing that. The main stream media though would not treat a Republican ex KKKer the same as a Democrate ex KKKer.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
No pitbull its not a collection of misfits, like I stated it is an Organic movement with no true leadership at the top. We have an agenda to restore this country from going into a socialist state as is currently heading into.
It will organize and when you say that the republicans and dems will destroy you are wrong the opposite will happen. The center and the right will overcome both. See what you fail to realize is that most Americans agree with our principles. The wishy washy left are being bought at the moment, when the money runs out…then they will see what wrong they have committed.
Also your passive-aggressive statements dont pass by me, just state what you want too. Quit tip-toeing and act like a Man.
Also I hate LULAC and La Raza, I donated my time to them for a year and saw how fucking corrupt they are here in Dallas. Its such a disgrace the throw 1k scholarship but they pocket the rest of the gov. grants through landscaping or other pet projects to friends.
Once the money of the left is dry and they are exposed which is unfolding slowly but surely, things will change. [/quote]
You know , I hope you are right. Right now they have some healthy opponents ,and we have a large percentage of Americans that are incapable of original thought.Most of the people are just like the ones on this board , It is OK to kill thousands of people , but if you kill a Zygote then you are the lowest of lows.
One of the attractive points to the tea party , which is fiscal conservative absent the social trappings of the MORAL MAJORITY. I believe I was wrong. ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION. Sounds like the Republican party on steroids . Did not touch the military, did not touch the war on drugs . If they are going to be different I wish they would act it [/quote]
It is my impression that they are primarily against FEDERAL tax dollars going to pay for abortions, and believe R v W wrongly expanded the constitution.
Thats just an impression, and I’m not evaluating it.
But interestingly I started reading a book called Freakanomics today and the first chapter is talking about how abortions cut projected homocides to about 30% of projected levels in the years following Roe v Wade, because abortions tended to abort children who were in “groups” that were statistically more likely to produce murderers.[/quote]
I still think it to be a far greater crime to kill people than a Zygote. IMO until that life can live on it’s own it is the mothers decision, I may think she is a piece of trash, but it is HER decision to make if it is the right time to bring a child into her life . Once that child can breath on it’s own then I would say it is murder.
I read freakanomics , great book, I can’t remeber it all , but still great book:)
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
No pitbull its not a collection of misfits, like I stated it is an Organic movement with no true leadership at the top. We have an agenda to restore this country from going into a socialist state as is currently heading into.
It will organize and when you say that the republicans and dems will destroy you are wrong the opposite will happen. The center and the right will overcome both. See what you fail to realize is that most Americans agree with our principles. The wishy washy left are being bought at the moment, when the money runs out…then they will see what wrong they have committed.
Also your passive-aggressive statements dont pass by me, just state what you want too. Quit tip-toeing and act like a Man.
Also I hate LULAC and La Raza, I donated my time to them for a year and saw how fucking corrupt they are here in Dallas. Its such a disgrace the throw 1k scholarship but they pocket the rest of the gov. grants through landscaping or other pet projects to friends.
Once the money of the left is dry and they are exposed which is unfolding slowly but surely, things will change. [/quote]
You know , I hope you are right. Right now they have some healthy opponents ,and we have a large percentage of Americans that are incapable of original thought.Most of the people are just like the ones on this board , It is OK to kill thousands of people , but if you kill a Zygote then you are the lowest of lows.
One of the attractive points to the tea party , which is fiscal conservative absent the social trappings of the MORAL MAJORITY. I believe I was wrong. ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION. Sounds like the Republican party on steroids . Did not touch the military, did not touch the war on drugs . If they are going to be different I wish they would act it [/quote]
It is my impression that they are primarily against FEDERAL tax dollars going to pay for abortions, and believe R v W wrongly expanded the constitution.
Thats just an impression, and I’m not evaluating it.
But interestingly I started reading a book called Freakanomics today and the first chapter is talking about how abortions cut projected homocides to about 30% of projected levels in the years following Roe v Wade, because abortions tended to abort children who were in “groups” that were statistically more likely to produce murderers.[/quote]
I still think it to be a far greater crime to kill people than a Zygote. IMO until that life can live on it’s own it is the mothers decision, I may think she is a piece of trash, but it is HER decision to make if it is the right time to bring a child into her life . Once that child can breath on it’s own then I would say it is murder.
I read freakanomics , great book, I can’t remeber it all , but still great book:)[/quote]
Personally I think that we should just make the mother the legal due process judge over depriving the fetus of life. Then let God sort out who was right or wrong. I still think that if someone else were to kill your fetus against your will it should be murder. If my wife were pregnant and knew in her soul that the pregnancy was going to turn out very bad, I wouldn’t want her to have to prove to a judge that her feelings are on the mark.
I am open to debate and to move in either direction though. I think its more wrong to kill a fetus that has taken the basic human form than one that is still a blastula for example.
I also don’t hold that birth control that “may” prevent implantation after fertilization is murder, as some religious folk do. There have been two bills in CO that have tried to go to that level. If they started smaller and just said “after 3 months” it would have gotten a lot more votes. I think ending a pregnancy is morally wrong, but I don’t know when the state should get to call it murder.
I do agree with the above comments that a lot of Tea Party members are concerned primarily with fiscal conservatism. I also think, though, that some of the more ridiculous/radical elements are pulling the movement (and the GOP in general) down into the gutter.
For instance, 51% of likely Republican primary voters believe that Obama is not a US citizen. The level of mass stupidity/ignorance/racism (yes, racism)/gullibility that that statistic betrays is astounding. Not unrelatedly, Donald Trump is now suddenly looking like a viable Republican candidate despite all of the truly idiotic things he’s been saying publicly for the past month.
I know these things aren’t de jure Tea Party concerns, but I think all of these disparate elements of modern conservatism have become worryingly entangled. Intelligent conservatives, whether they be Tea Party members or not, need to distance themselves from the vitriol and stupidity that is running rampant through the GOP. People need to be able to vote for pecuniary responsibility without having to also accept weak-mindedness, fervent religiosity, and uneducated bigotry. If that can’t be done Obama will absolutely crush the opposition in 2012.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Why is it ok to be racist towards white people[/quote]
It isn’t. That’s a shitty story about your grandma, those people were fucktards.[/quote]
Again, I am not trying to sound repetitive here…but a micro portion of the Tea party is racist…so the whole group gets the label.
A part of the Democratic party voting block (some minorities) are just as racist…yet the whole party gets a free pass…why? [/quote]
Because you are a white devil.
Your ancestors enslaved people (yet there were also black slave traders too.)
True story here in So Cal…
In Orange County, a couple of white kids beat up a minority kid (not sure what minority he is yet.) Cops arrest the kids, and charges of a hate crime are being pursued. Here at Dodger Stadium, an off-duty paramedic (white guy father of 2) was beaten by Latino gangmembers for wearing a Giants jersey. Yes, he was beaten into a coma, beaten even when he was laying on the ground unconscious. Are hate crime charges being filed? Nope. Why? Because the Latino mayor doesn’t want to offend the Hispanic population here. The gangmembers are still at large. The owner of the Dodgers has been ridiculed for lack of security, the same gang element that has set roots into the Dodger culture, said that this was an isolated incident (again to not inflame the Latino people of Los Angeles.)
It’s a fucking joke. [/quote]
Mayor Viragosa is a racist prike thats for sure.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
No pitbull its not a collection of misfits, like I stated it is an Organic movement with no true leadership at the top. We have an agenda to restore this country from going into a socialist state as is currently heading into.
It will organize and when you say that the republicans and dems will destroy you are wrong the opposite will happen. The center and the right will overcome both. See what you fail to realize is that most Americans agree with our principles. The wishy washy left are being bought at the moment, when the money runs out…then they will see what wrong they have committed.
Also your passive-aggressive statements dont pass by me, just state what you want too. Quit tip-toeing and act like a Man.
Also I hate LULAC and La Raza, I donated my time to them for a year and saw how fucking corrupt they are here in Dallas. Its such a disgrace the throw 1k scholarship but they pocket the rest of the gov. grants through landscaping or other pet projects to friends.
Once the money of the left is dry and they are exposed which is unfolding slowly but surely, things will change. [/quote]
You know , I hope you are right. Right now they have some healthy opponents ,and we have a large percentage of Americans that are incapable of original thought.Most of the people are just like the ones on this board , It is OK to kill thousands of people , but if you kill a Zygote then you are the lowest of lows.
One of the attractive points to the tea party , which is fiscal conservative absent the social trappings of the MORAL MAJORITY. I believe I was wrong. ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION. Sounds like the Republican party on steroids . Did not touch the military, did not touch the war on drugs . If they are going to be different I wish they would act it [/quote]
It is my impression that they are primarily against FEDERAL tax dollars going to pay for abortions, and believe R v W wrongly expanded the constitution.
Thats just an impression, and I’m not evaluating it.
But interestingly I started reading a book called Freakanomics today and the first chapter is talking about how abortions cut projected homocides to about 30% of projected levels in the years following Roe v Wade, because abortions tended to abort children who were in “groups” that were statistically more likely to produce murderers.[/quote]
I still think it to be a far greater crime to kill people than a Zygote. IMO until that life can live on it’s own it is the mothers decision, I may think she is a piece of trash, but it is HER decision to make if it is the right time to bring a child into her life . Once that child can breath on it’s own then I would say it is murder.
I read freakanomics , great book, I can’t remeber it all , but still great book:)[/quote]
Personally I think that we should just make the mother the legal due process judge over depriving the fetus of life. Then let God sort out who was right or wrong. I still think that if someone else were to kill your fetus against your will it should be murder. If my wife were pregnant and knew in her soul that the pregnancy was going to turn out very bad, I wouldn’t want her to have to prove to a judge that her feelings are on the mark.
I am open to debate and to move in either direction though. I think its more wrong to kill a fetus that has taken the basic human form than one that is still a blastula for example.
I also don’t hold that birth control that “may” prevent implantation after fertilization is murder, as some religious folk do. There have been two bills in CO that have tried to go to that level. If they started smaller and just said “after 3 months” it would have gotten a lot more votes. I think ending a pregnancy is morally wrong, but I don’t know when the state should get to call it murder.[/quote]
I agree about leaving Mom to make the decision, the part about some one killing your fetus , I would agree if it were intentional , an accident is that , an accident.
The birth control is that birth control , it would be like making masturbation illegal, STUPID.
Mentioning that did not the Tea baggers have a candidate that wanted to make masturbation illegal ?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
No pitbull its not a collection of misfits, like I stated it is an Organic movement with no true leadership at the top. We have an agenda to restore this country from going into a socialist state as is currently heading into.
It will organize and when you say that the republicans and dems will destroy you are wrong the opposite will happen. The center and the right will overcome both. See what you fail to realize is that most Americans agree with our principles. The wishy washy left are being bought at the moment, when the money runs out…then they will see what wrong they have committed.
Also your passive-aggressive statements dont pass by me, just state what you want too. Quit tip-toeing and act like a Man.
Also I hate LULAC and La Raza, I donated my time to them for a year and saw how fucking corrupt they are here in Dallas. Its such a disgrace the throw 1k scholarship but they pocket the rest of the gov. grants through landscaping or other pet projects to friends.
Once the money of the left is dry and they are exposed which is unfolding slowly but surely, things will change. [/quote]
You know , I hope you are right. Right now they have some healthy opponents ,and we have a large percentage of Americans that are incapable of original thought.Most of the people are just like the ones on this board , It is OK to kill thousands of people , but if you kill a Zygote then you are the lowest of lows.
One of the attractive points to the tea party , which is fiscal conservative absent the social trappings of the MORAL MAJORITY. I believe I was wrong. ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION. Sounds like the Republican party on steroids . Did not touch the military, did not touch the war on drugs . If they are going to be different I wish they would act it [/quote]
It is my impression that they are primarily against FEDERAL tax dollars going to pay for abortions, and believe R v W wrongly expanded the constitution.
Thats just an impression, and I’m not evaluating it.
But interestingly I started reading a book called Freakanomics today and the first chapter is talking about how abortions cut projected homocides to about 30% of projected levels in the years following Roe v Wade, because abortions tended to abort children who were in “groups” that were statistically more likely to produce murderers.[/quote]
I still think it to be a far greater crime to kill people than a Zygote. IMO until that life can live on it’s own it is the mothers decision, I may think she is a piece of trash, but it is HER decision to make if it is the right time to bring a child into her life . Once that child can breath on it’s own then I would say it is murder.
I read freakanomics , great book, I can’t remeber it all , but still great book:)[/quote]
Personally I think that we should just make the mother the legal due process judge over depriving the fetus of life. Then let God sort out who was right or wrong. I still think that if someone else were to kill your fetus against your will it should be murder. If my wife were pregnant and knew in her soul that the pregnancy was going to turn out very bad, I wouldn’t want her to have to prove to a judge that her feelings are on the mark.
I am open to debate and to move in either direction though. I think its more wrong to kill a fetus that has taken the basic human form than one that is still a blastula for example.
I also don’t hold that birth control that “may” prevent implantation after fertilization is murder, as some religious folk do. There have been two bills in CO that have tried to go to that level. If they started smaller and just said “after 3 months” it would have gotten a lot more votes. I think ending a pregnancy is morally wrong, but I don’t know when the state should get to call it murder.[/quote]
I agree about leaving Mom to make the decision, the part about some one killing your fetus , I would agree if it were intentional , an accident is that , an accident.
The birth control is that birth control , it would be like making masturbation illegal, STUPID.
Mentioning that did not the Tea baggers have a candidate that wanted to make masturbation illegal ?
[/quote]
lol Christine O’Donnell was part of an anti-masturbation campaign on MTV in the 90s and has stated that looking at porn is akin to adultery.
Of course ridiculous shit like that didn’t bother the mouthbreathers that got her nominated in the first place.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Mentioning that did not the Tea baggers have a candidate that wanted to make masturbation illegal ?
[/quote]
Nonsense
[quote]smh23 wrote:
lol Christine O’Donnell was part of an anti-masturbation campaign on MTV in the 90s and has stated that looking at porn is akin to adultery.
Of course ridiculous shit like that didn’t bother the mouthbreathers that got her nominated in the first place.[/quote]
So?
And why would it?
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
lol Christine O’Donnell was part of an anti-masturbation campaign on MTV in the 90s and has stated that looking at porn is akin to adultery.
Of course ridiculous shit like that didn’t bother the mouthbreathers that got her nominated in the first place.[/quote]
So?
And why would it?
[/quote]
If you don’t think beliefs like that are ridiculous in the 21st century then I don’t have the time or desire to explain it to you.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Mentioning that did not the Tea baggers have a candidate that wanted to make masturbation illegal ?
[/quote]
Nonsense[/quote]
Truly nonsenses, the problem is there are people that like to control other people
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
lol Christine O’Donnell was part of an anti-masturbation campaign on MTV in the 90s and has stated that looking at porn is akin to adultery.
Of course ridiculous shit like that didn’t bother the mouthbreathers that got her nominated in the first place.[/quote]
So?
And why would it?
[/quote]
If you don’t think beliefs like that are ridiculous in the 21st century then I don’t have the time or desire to explain it to you.[/quote]
What if they are?
There are people who think that they can plan 1/6 of the largest economy on earth and make a better job of it than the markets.
I prefer people who try not to force their superstitions on me by force and if that means that they drool on television, so be it.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Mentioning that did not the Tea baggers have a candidate that wanted to make masturbation illegal ?
[/quote]
Nonsense[/quote]
Truly nonsenses, the problem is there are people that like to control other people [/quote]
She wanted to “control” other people by convincing them and she was not very succesful.
So, where is the problem?
The problem is that she showed herself to be unintelligent.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
The problem is that she showed herself to be unintelligent.[/quote]
That is no problem if I do not want to do her anything except votin no to just about everything.
Plus, intelligent people who can give great, rousing speeches from teleprompters and who lack to humility and experience to comprehend how little they actually can do without wreaking havoc are a much bigger threat.
Plus, at this point I sincerely doubt that she would have lowered the average intelligence of the US deliberative bodies.