Tea Party Organizer Is Epitome Of Privilege

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I disagree.

Ask a black person OUTSIDE of a few select urban centers what ACORN is, and besides the nut, they would most likely have never heard of them.

In one of those ironies of National Political Life, more whites probably know about ACORN than blacks; and most of them know it simply as an instrument to pistol whip the President with.

Mufasa[/quote]

That’s all well and good, but a huge percentage of black people ARE in those urban centers and while they may not know ACORN by name many are effected by it’s influence regardless, even if it’s indirectly.

This president is an overt Abominable affront to all things American and I will be wielding every legitimate substantive instrument I can get my hands on. (Figuratively speaking of course)

62

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
I disagree.

Ask a black person OUTSIDE of a few select urban centers what ACORN is, and besides the nut, they would most likely have never heard of them.

In one of those ironies of National Political Life, more whites probably know about ACORN than blacks; and most of them know it simply as an instrument to pistol whip the President with.

Mufasa

That’s all well and good, but a huge percentage of black people ARE in those urban centers and while they may not know ACORN by name many are effected by it’s influence regardless, even if it’s indirectly.

This president is an overt Abominable affront to all things American and I will be wielding every legitimate substantive instrument I can get my hands on. (Figuratively speaking of course)[/quote]

That’s fine too…

But don’t imply like Hedo did that a rally for ACORN is what it would take to get more black people out to a rally.

Mufasa

63

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
I disagree.

Ask a black person OUTSIDE of a few select urban centers what ACORN is, and besides the nut, they would most likely have never heard of them.

In one of those ironies of National Political Life, more whites probably know about ACORN than blacks; and most of them know it simply as an instrument to pistol whip the President with.

Mufasa

That’s all well and good, but a huge percentage of black people ARE in those urban centers and while they may not know ACORN by name many are effected by it’s influence regardless, even if it’s indirectly.

This president is an overt Abominable affront to all things American and I will be wielding every legitimate substantive instrument I can get my hands on. (Figuratively speaking of course)

That’s fine too…

But don’t make imply like Hedo did that a rally for ACORN is what it would take to get more black people out to a rally.

Mufasa

[/quote]

Fair enough.

Where I live I am up to my armpits in black people. A huge number are about half literate (decades of democrat controlled Detroit public schools) and couldn’t care less who the president is even if it’s Obama.

Of the rest, a huge percentage love Obama for no particular actual reason they can articulate other than he’s black (half anyway), a smaller but significant percentage are genuine liberals for whom Obama being black is a bonus, a very small percentage voted for him but have the good sense to now recognize that as a mistake and an infinitesimal number saw the guy all along as the enemy of especially blacks that he is.

At least in my admittedly unscientific, but nonetheless fairly substantial experience.

64

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Yea…

But let’s see YOU march, Pat, wearing chaps, heels and a bustiere!!!

(Just kidding!)

Mufasa

[/quote]

I’ll meet you at the Blue Oyster Bar.

They say Lincon was gay, here’s proof!

65

[quote]cherub_daemon wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
I would challenge one of T-Nation’s resident liberals to present a federal program that has been successful. I’ll give you a hint, it sure as hell isn’t social security or medicaid.

With that caveat in mind:

Rural Electrification – A New Deal creature, it arose because private power companies didn’t want to run lines out to the farmers…not enough profit.

The Securities and Exchange Commission – Regulates the financial markets so that stock fraud and insider trading don’t cripple the equities market.

NACA – The predecessor to NASA, it performed a great deal of basic research in the 30’s and 40’s that set up America’s aeronautics industry in a globally dominant position.

The National Weather Service – They’re really freaking good at what they do, and prevent shipwrecks and plane crashes far in excess of their budget.

[/quote]

The Military

Tricare

NASA

Federal Student Aid Program

66

[quote]hedo wrote:

You guys should have looked at the one in D.C. on the 12th. It was a lot larger then 100K and minorities were…in the minority but were present throughout the demonstration.

I’m sure a rally in support of Acorn might have drew more.[/quote]

All the reports I have read estimated 100K people, and all the video and photos I have seen held no minorities.

I have to believe what I have seen. I don’t suppose you have sources to the opposite of my observations?

67

[quote]Rockscar wrote:

When Cap and Tax passes, expect to pay about 1,300 more a year on expenses for energy and all products requiring transportation…oh that’s not a tax right? State of CA raised my taxes and I have NOT seen any tax breaks in my income. did you get that 8 bucks Pete?[/quote]

I have not read the bill yet. Can you link it for me?

68

[quote]JPCleary wrote:

I cannot defend, condone, or even comprehend why someone thinks it is a good idea to bring an automatic rifle to an Obama Rally.

Oh the irony of this post is just painful…

What I understand is that the left wing MSM falsely reported that this guy’s civilian, semi-automatic AR-15 was an “Automatic Rifle” over and over, and it began to sink in. It sank in and now you acted on what you “thought” was news and posted it as fact here in this thread.
[/quote]

Well I am glad you find security and sanity in the fact it was “semi” automatic and not fully automatic.

Personally, I felt the fact some guy brought a gun to a rally sponsored by President Obama was the crux of the issue, the degree to which it fires independently is irrelevant.

It is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible to bring a gun to a rally where the President of this country is speaking. Let alone two guns.

Oh…let me guess, I got it wrong, it was a woman and that makes it OKAY in your book.

69

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Petedacook wrote:

This is damned childish and you know it. Tiller’s killer was a fundy Christian. The museum shooter was and old racist bastard. A small handful of people hardly represent a full half of the political spectrum. I hardly blame the entire left wing for the acts of the Unibomber. I don’t assume all of “the left” laughed and had parties while watching that movie where they assasinate Bush. You’ve got this cartoonish vision of your political enemies. In so doing you are never going to taken seriously.

[/quote]

OKAY. I will agree this is the fringe people that I am presenting as representative of the whole…if you can provide examples of individuals on the left performing atrocities of equal caliber during Bush’s reign.

70

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

The Military
[/quote]

The military can be run better by civilians in most circumstances. For the most part the military is a money-pit used to fund projects most heavily lobbied for. Just because the existence of the military is necessary doesn’t mean that it is generally not run as a failure.

Have you any idea how much more efficient our military would be if we spent 10% of our aircraft budget on tech for ground troops? But that wouldn’t line the right pockets now would it?

[quote]
Tricare[/quote]

I was under Tricare for a good portion of my life and my father has been under Tricare for the bulk of his life. It failed me in a big way and my dad has never really needed it.

Hardly. I suppose you could consider this a success if the goal is to make people more dependant on the federal government, water down the value of a college education, raise the price of college several times that over “big oil” and enslave citizens to debt for many years of their life.

mike

71

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
Petedacook wrote:

This is damned childish and you know it. Tiller’s killer was a fundy Christian. The museum shooter was and old racist bastard. A small handful of people hardly represent a full half of the political spectrum. I hardly blame the entire left wing for the acts of the Unibomber. I don’t assume all of “the left” laughed and had parties while watching that movie where they assasinate Bush. You’ve got this cartoonish vision of your political enemies. In so doing you are never going to taken seriously.

OKAY. I will agree this is the fringe people that I am presenting as representative of the whole…if you can provide examples of individuals on the left performing atrocities of equal caliber during Bush’s reign.

[/quote]
I don’t assume what follows is every liberal. Otherwise I’d be afraid of my nice neighbors who share their veggies with us, or I wouldn’t shop at the co-op. I’m in a liberal bastion here. However, I’ve yet to have a Republican be anything but cordial to me with the exception of some college kids who yelled at my truck as they drove by and saw my Ron Paul sign. I was however yelled at and sworn at at the county fair in front of my 8 month old daughter because I had a "no socialized medicine"sticker. I’ve been flipped off repeatedly by people with liberal bumper stickers. I’ve been yelled at in the grocery store and told I’m compensating for my small penis because I had a pistol on my hip. I’ve been yelled at during a senseless tirade against Bush during a debate I was asked to attend by a local human rights group about Iraq. I didn’t even say anything about Bush. (probably because I didn’t like him)

Frankly the only supposed group of people who have been more abusive to me than liberals have been the police. Either way I don’t see “left wingers” as evil. I think they’re policies are well-intentioned and misguided. I think most of them are very nice people and will continue to judge them by their idealogical differences rather than group them all to attack them on as being a hive-mind of crazy fanatics.

30 seconds on google looking up “left wing violence”.

http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson092904.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200410051802.asp
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-05-gop-office-attack_x.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1233229/posts

Anyshit, I’ve got some lawsmithing to do. Off to work.

mike

72

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

Well I am glad you find security and sanity in the fact it was “semi” automatic and not fully automatic.

Personally, I felt the fact some guy brought a gun to a rally sponsored by President Obama was the crux of the issue, the degree to which it fires independently is irrelevant. [/quote]

You fail to catch the point. The point is that the news has misrepresented us and made our guns sound extra scary. You accepted the misinformation while crying about the misinformation being swallowed by the tea party crowd. If you want to say that it’s wrong to have guns that’s fine, but it’s dishonest or ignorant to repeat that they’re bringing assault rifles.[quote]

It is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible to bring a gun to a rally where the President of this country is speaking. Let alone two guns. [/quote]

Pete, this is political speech. I’d expect you to respect that.

mike

73

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

It is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible to bring a gun to a rally where the President of this country is speaking. Let alone two guns.

[/quote]

Why?

74

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
I disagree.

Ask a black person OUTSIDE of a few select urban centers what ACORN is, and besides the nut, they would most likely have never heard of them.

In one of those ironies of National Political Life, more whites probably know about ACORN than blacks; and most of them know it simply as an instrument to pistol whip the President with.

Mufasa

That’s all well and good, but a huge percentage of black people ARE in those urban centers and while they may not know ACORN by name many are effected by it’s influence regardless, even if it’s indirectly.

This president is an overt Abominable affront to all things American and I will be wielding every legitimate substantive instrument I can get my hands on. (Figuratively speaking of course)

That’s fine too…

But don’t imply like Hedo did that a rally for ACORN is what it would take to get more black people out to a rally.

Mufasa

[/quote]

Mufasa,

I stand by my comment that a rally for Acorn, regardless of where it was held, would draw a larger percentage of minorities. This would be especially true in D.C.

Unlike the crowd at the 9/12 event it would be largely professionally organized and the special interest groups like SEIU would provide free transportation and demand it’s members support it and attend.

75

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
hedo wrote:

You guys should have looked at the one in D.C. on the 12th. It was a lot larger then 100K and minorities were…in the minority but were present throughout the demonstration.

I’m sure a rally in support of Acorn might have drew more.

All the reports I have read estimated 100K people, and all the video and photos I have seen held no minorities.

I have to believe what I have seen. I don’t suppose you have sources to the opposite of my observations? [/quote]

All the reports you read. I think you may have read reports of a limited scope. Reports I read were 300-500K. Do you have a reference for the 100K you claim?

Edit for link: The Real Number of Protesters - Zac Moilanen | PDF | National Mall | Tea Party Movement
Seems like a bit more then 100K if calculated correctly.

76

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
SteelyD wrote:

I see hypocrasy(sp?) everywhere here. Liberals/Left/Dem, whatever, always cry about corporate money, special interest groups, lobbyists, etc, yet rely HEAVILY on them as much (equally) as Republicans (of which I am not one regardless of the assumptions by some).

I agree totally. The Democrats cry about the Republicans stopping them from doing this and doing that, and “Oh they will filibuster, so we can’t help the American people.”

Now they have no excuses. They can pass health care without Republican support. The fact is, they don’t want to. It is not in the interest of their lobbyists.

I am a left wing whack job. I admit the Democrats suck. I don’t think they are spineless, I think that is their modus operandi. Until people on both sides of the fence unite and vote both of these f*ckers out, we will continue to have empty promises and excuses.

I had hope that Obama would change things. That hope is diminishing quickly. [/quote]

I wish they’d pass something so I know where I stand. I kind of like Obama when he sticks to his principals but when he starts compromising on everything even when he doesn’t have to I just sit back and say ‘Whatever’.

77

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
JPCleary wrote:

I cannot defend, condone, or even comprehend why someone thinks it is a good idea to bring an automatic rifle to an Obama Rally.

Oh the irony of this post is just painful…

What I understand is that the left wing MSM falsely reported that this guy’s civilian, semi-automatic AR-15 was an “Automatic Rifle” over and over, and it began to sink in. It sank in and now you acted on what you “thought” was news and posted it as fact here in this thread.

Well I am glad you find security and sanity in the fact it was “semi” automatic and not fully automatic.

Personally, I felt the fact some guy brought a gun to a rally sponsored by President Obama was the crux of the issue, the degree to which it fires independently is irrelevant.

It is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible to bring a gun to a rally where the President of this country is speaking. Let alone two guns.

Oh…let me guess, I got it wrong, it was a woman and that makes it OKAY in your book.
[/quote]

I have to admit, that was a nice side step there, Pete…very crafty of you. I particular appreciate the calculated omission of your entire quote…only leaving behind the part about the rifle, thereby taking out the context.

So let me add that right back in there for you…

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
What I understand about their anger is that it is fed by the misleading media. When people are told “Tiller is a killer” over and over, it begins to sink in. It sinks in and the act on what they “thought” was news.

I cannot defend, condone, or even comprehend why someone thinks it is a good idea to bring an automatic rifle to an Obama Rally.[/quote]

There now…

What I was commenting on was the irony in your, “…anger is that it is fed by the misleading media.” tid-bit.

Your point was that the right-wingers you so detest are angry only as a result of the brainwashing of the right wing media…i.e. Fox News. Using your “Tiller is a Killer” example, you illustrated that through using this phrase over and over again it began to sink in with these right wingers. And they were acting on what they thought was news.

All of that was fine. I don’t necessarily agree with all of that…but you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

But then you followed this up with an erroneous statement based on what? …the left wing main stream media reporting over and over again that this guy was carrying an “Assault Weapon” or an “Automatic Weapon”.

If you can’t identify the irony in that…I don’t what to tell you.

And the irony is what I was commenting on…not the validity of your opinion, nor whether or not carrying a weapon at an Obama rally is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible.

78

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
The Military

The military can be run better by civilians in most circumstances. For the most part the military is a money-pit used to fund projects most heavily lobbied for. Just because the existence of the military is necessary doesn’t mean that it is generally not run as a failure.

Have you any idea how much more efficient our military would be if we spent 10% of our aircraft budget on tech for ground troops? But that wouldn’t line the right pockets now would it?
[/quote]

I just read “Kill Zone: A Sniper Novel” by Sgt. Jack Coughlin and Donald Davis. It is about just that-- a private security company stages a coup with some high ranking elected officials. Action, suspense, and hi-tech weaponry kills ensue…

/offtopic

79

[quote]JPCleary wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
JPCleary wrote:

I cannot defend, condone, or even comprehend why someone thinks it is a good idea to bring an automatic rifle to an Obama Rally.

Oh the irony of this post is just painful…

What I understand is that the left wing MSM falsely reported that this guy’s civilian, semi-automatic AR-15 was an “Automatic Rifle” over and over, and it began to sink in. It sank in and now you acted on what you “thought” was news and posted it as fact here in this thread.

Well I am glad you find security and sanity in the fact it was “semi” automatic and not fully automatic.

Personally, I felt the fact some guy brought a gun to a rally sponsored by President Obama was the crux of the issue, the degree to which it fires independently is irrelevant.

It is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible to bring a gun to a rally where the President of this country is speaking. Let alone two guns.

Oh…let me guess, I got it wrong, it was a woman and that makes it OKAY in your book.

I have to admit, that was a nice side step there, Pete…very crafty of you. I particular appreciate the calculated omission of your entire quote…only leaving behind the part about the rifle, thereby taking out the context.

So let me add that right back in there for you…

Petedacook wrote:
What I understand about their anger is that it is fed by the misleading media. When people are told “Tiller is a killer” over and over, it begins to sink in. It sinks in and the act on what they “thought” was news.

I cannot defend, condone, or even comprehend why someone thinks it is a good idea to bring an automatic rifle to an Obama Rally.

There now…

What I was commenting on was the irony in your, “…anger is that it is fed by the misleading media.” tid-bit.

Your point was that the right-wingers you so detest are angry only as a result of the brainwashing of the right wing media…i.e. Fox News. Using your “Tiller is a Killer” example, you illustrated that through using this phrase over and over again it began to sink in with these right wingers. And they were acting on what they thought was news.

All of that was fine. I don’t necessarily agree with all of that…but you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

But then you followed this up with an erroneous statement based on what? …the left wing main stream media reporting over and over again that this guy was carrying an “Assault Weapon” or an “Automatic Weapon”.

If you can’t identify the irony in that…I don’t what to tell you.

And the irony is what I was commenting on…not the validity of your opinion, nor whether or not carrying a weapon at an Obama rally is socially, morally, ethically, and responsibly reprehensible.

[/quote]

OK, well instead of truncating what I am quoting to make it easier on the eyes, I will leave that in there for you since you think it is some kind of conspiracy to deceive readers of what was in the original quote…even though that original piece may inches above this one.

I can see why you can write irony into that quote, but the facts is there is irony. I do not watch TV. I saw the headlines on posts, and what I recall seeing was “automatic rifle.” Yes, the posts said semi-automatic rifle.

If I felt the efficiency of the gun, and mnot the GUN itself was the critical pqart, I would have looked it up.

There is a stark difference between telling people to bring guns to health care protests, or inciting hate and terrorism, than my faulty memory and total dismissal of minutia like the efficiency of the gun.

I will be sure to get every single detail in every single post accurate so you don’t write any more irony into the post, or my error.

It is clear now why I could not see any irony at first, because in reality there wasn’t any. It was not brain mne being mislead by the media, it was me being lazy.

80

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

It is clear now why I could not see any irony at first, because in reality there wasn’t any. It was not brain mne being mislead by the media, it was me being lazy. [/quote]

One would think that being lazy would lead you to say that he simply had a gun rather than an assault weapon.

mike