[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think most people can afford food , most Cities have a section 8 housing program, Higways, electric, schools ( I know they could be better ) all are subsidised or are social programs[/quote]
You forgot to mention they are all shining examples of success.[/quote]
Name me one place , that does not take care of the poor and are shining examples of success
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Some things like infrastructure, health care, Education, and food should (at least) be subsidized so every body can afford them.[/quote]
Hence KILLING any and ALL personal drive and ingenuity this country once possessed. This is the core of why Socialism is a bad thing.[/quote]
I think where we disagree, is even if we did not have these programs we would still have unmotivated people, I am sure there is a small number of people that you are spot on about. I give you that
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Yes, it’s a tremendous economic benefit to destroy billions of dollars worth of vehicles.[/quote]
/facepalm
Every day I wake up and thank God that we don’t have Republicans in Canada.[/quote]
That’s a coincidence of sorts because every day I wake up and thank God I don’t live in Canada.
[quote]SeanParent wrote:
There’s going to be another civil war in this country very sooon…all I know is that even though my opinion basically doesn’t mean squat to anybody “important” I am going to be kicking a fuckload of ass when shit hits the fan.
[/quote]
Forgive me but you are very far off the mark. Now promise that you will be kind to everyone and not harm yourself either.
[quote]Nick Danger wrote:
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Yes, it’s a tremendous economic benefit to destroy billions of dollars worth of vehicles.[/quote]
The way it was handled, yes.
I’m wondering if it could have been done in a way to be effective. Say restrict the clunkers to those with the very worst mileage/pollution, and restrict the new cars to those with much better gas mileage. Plus efficiently recycling the clunkers for scrap and parts.
[/quote]
Hey, here’s an idea how about the government get the heck out of the way and let industry go forward? You think that might help end the economic recession? You know I bet it would.
[quote]Nick Danger wrote:
Call me an “illiterate coward” then criticize me for personal attacks?[/quote]
You are a coward because of your constant personal attacks. You’re illiterate because, well, I think that one is obvious.
[quote]…you’ve been called on one of your liberal talking points…
Yes, my criticizing your parroting the silly/hypocritical teleprompter stuff and both the right and left wing loonies is a liberal talking point.[/quote]
As I’ve had to remind you over and over again, simply because another party that you might not respect has mentioned something does not mean that they are wrong.
Your lack of good logic is remarkable.
[quote]I made a lengthy list of Obama’s failures and why he has failed in his first year in office. You didn’t like that yet you have no legitimate response. Instead of debating the many points that I outlined…
I’ll make it simple for you – I argued “apples” (your silly teleprompter stuff), you reply with ‘oranges’ (your long list of complaints against obama), and you are pretending oranges answers apples, and then criticizing me for not following you down orange lane.[/quote]
You can say something is silly all day long. What does that really mean? My long list of complaints regarding Obama are accurate regardless of where else you may have heard them. You’re a funny little boy you know that?
Wow, I’ve never read that before on the Internet. Ha ha come on junior I have not even broken a slow stride yet, you’re just too easy.
[quote]
There’s this thing called Principle, where you apply the same standards to yourself as you do others, and to those you like as to those you dislike.[/quote]
Yes, and you should try doing it now and then.
I usually don’t take the advice of kids who are still in college. Now run along junior and take your lack of logic and understanding with you.
Par for the course, you have no argument other than to name call. You are truly pathetic junior
Back to Palin.
I don’t quite know what to make of it; but it’s interesting.
Based on the latest postings; the “leadership”? of the Tea Party is not warming-up to Palin:
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Back to Palin.
I don’t quite know what to make of it; but it’s interesting.
Based on the latest postings; the “leadership”? of the Tea Party is not warming-up to Palin:
Mufasa
[/quote]
I said in another thread that the convention was about finding the right message and would shrug off anyone who hurts their message.
That’s partly why I’m confused.
I thought she was “carrying the message”.
Mufasa
The best way I’ve heard it described from a person involved with our local ‘tea parties’ is: “The tea party movement is amorphous and to hijack it amounts to trying to herd cats.”
The “Tea Party” is not a formal party like “Democrat” or “Republican”.
The tea parties have garnered support not only to protest the ever expanding government in all aspects of our lives, but also to protest the Republicans (the so-called ‘conservatives’) who have been part of the problem and not the solution.
The tea party people do not want the tea party to be Sarah Palin’s podium for self-promotion and to make her the face of the so-called ‘tea party movement’.
Because of her ability to cause liberals everywhere to froth at the mouth by merely mentioning her name, she’s a lighting rod for attention and she gets endless exposure in the media. Her picture along with ‘tea party’ means she becomes the de-facto representative for the movement-- which they don’t want.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
The best way I’ve heard it described from a person involved with our local ‘tea parties’ is: “The tea party movement is amorphous and to hijack it amounts to trying to herd cats.”
The “Tea Party” is not a formal party like “Democrat” or “Republican”.
The tea parties have garnered support not only to protest the ever expanding government in all aspects of our lives, but also to protest the Republicans (the so-called ‘conservatives’) who have been part of the problem and not the solution.
The tea party people do not want the tea party to be Sarah Palin’s podium for self-promotion and to make her the face of the so-called ‘tea party movement’.
Because of her ability to cause liberals everywhere to froth at the mouth by merely mentioning her name, she’s a lighting rod for attention and she gets endless exposure in the media. Her picture along with ‘tea party’ means she becomes the de-facto representative for the movement-- which they don’t want.[/quote]
Spot On!
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Back to Palin.
I don’t quite know what to make of it; but it’s interesting.
Based on the latest postings; the “leadership”? of the Tea Party is not warming-up to Palin:
Mufasa
[/quote]
I linked to that back in the Tea Party Will go Nowhere Unless… thread.
It’s common that when something is perceived to be successful many will try to co-opt it. That it has no strong central leadership is both a strength but in this case a weakness, as that makes it easy for the press to associate it with a popular/charismatic leader.
The TEA party is having its principles tested – will it stand up for what it believes in and not allow itself to be used, or will go head-to-head to protect its identity.
Palin is having her principles tested too – will she go ‘mainstream’ republican in order to better position herself for a run in 2012 (like ‘maverick mccain’ did in 2008), especially as the election nears, or stick with her ‘maverick/whatever-you-call-it’ beliefs.
[quote]Nick Danger wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Back to Palin.
I don’t quite know what to make of it; but it’s interesting.
Based on the latest postings; the “leadership”? of the Tea Party is not warming-up to Palin:
Mufasa
[/quote]
Palin is self serving, she is endorsing John McCain and he is too ( liberal ) for the movement or for her criteria as well
I linked to that back in the Tea Party Will go Nowhere Unless… thread.
It’s common that when something is perceived to be successful many will try to co-opt it. That it has no strong central leadership is both a strength but in this case a weakness, as that makes it easy for the press to associate it with a popular/charismatic leader.
The TEA party is having its principles tested – will it stand up for what it believes in and not allow itself to be used, or will go head-to-head to protect its identity.
Palin is having her principles tested too – will she go ‘mainstream’ republican in order to better position herself for a run in 2012 (like ‘maverick mccain’ did in 2008), especially as the election nears, or stick with her ‘maverick/whatever-you-call-it’ beliefs.[/quote]
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
That’s partly why I’m confused.
I thought she was “carrying the message”.
Mufasa [/quote]
Apparently many feel she is not. So they are either going to have her speak about what more people care about. Sound money, ending the empire, balanced budget. If they can get her to keep it on those issues then they will keep her as a figure head. If she goes in another direction they will drop her. What you posted was a warning to her.
Interesting.
Thanks, guys!
Mufasa