The Tea Party is not socially conservative my ass

[emacknight]

You're referring to Inigo Montoya's response to my simple (and factually correct and WIki-cited) observation that the Tea Party has no specific leadership or spokesmen, perhaps?
...
But, but, I'd hate to miss it. When does it start?
It starts when you shut your trap and start letting facts shape your opinions (logic) and stop letting your opinions shape your facts (sophistry).

You're a joke here. Your persistent trolling for abuse always reminds me of Adam Sandler's "The Peeper." You should really just leave, you wouldn't be missed.

The most ignorant part about Starving Artist isn't that he's conservative, or that he's so blindly partisan that he'll spew what ever conservative ideology he happened to find that day, it's that he's redefined the very meaning of conservative and liberal in his warped and twisted little way.

Quite literally, he has set it up such that conservative is good, liberal is bad. A conservative is someone that does, or tries to do something that is honest and true. The opposite of that is a liberal, one who does something that is bad. A conservative politician is thus someone that does good things, and if the thing he does is bad than it wasn't a conservative it was a liberal. A conservative can't put forth liberal [wrong] policies, because then they aren't conservatives, they become liberals. Which in the end, makes him the perfect conservative.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Are you Muslim? Or do you just feel an aching in your loins to defend people who put laundry on their heads?
Silly me, and all these years I thought that it was Sikh men who are known for wearing turbans, not Muslims. Oh wait, it is.
Not quite. Only Sikh men wear dastar, but the word turban refers to any wound headdress, which are common among other South Asian, Middle Eastern and African cultures.

There are a number of Arab states where men normally wear turbans called amamah, such as Oman.

[Claverhouse]

Let me ask you this: What can the tea party do for me?


Ask not what your tea party can do for you; ask what you can do for your tea party.

[shy guy]

The various provisions in the "Contract from America" are either nonsensical, meaningless, or empty rhetoric. Usually some combination of the three. The Tea Partiers have no coherent economic goals whatever, have virtually no understanding of Constitutional law, and generally seem to have no idea what they're so mad about.

If the closest thing the Party has to an "official document" made even the slightest bit of sense it would do a lot to lessen the Party's image as a bunch of racist idiots.

[emacknight]

Last night Stephen Colbert interviewed Brendan Steinhouser (video here (http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/tue-october-12-2010-brendan-steinhauser), interview starts at 14min).

Steinhouser was introduced as "one of the leaders of the Tea Party Movement."

Good interview for anyone interested. Colbert tries pretty hard to trap the guy and push and agenda and actually fails pretty bad.

An interesting note: Steinhouser describes the movement starting in the fall of 2008 to protest TARP started by then Pres. Bush. But then admits no one gave a shit until the spring after Obama took office.

Blames the government for the rise in house prices.

He also describes the Tea Party as a "centrist movement" and considers Obama to be on the fringe. "We are on the dead center of American Politics." Considered Clinton to be a centrist.

Claims not to support Christine O'Donnell.

Claims the Tea Party will keep the Republican Party in check.

At 19:20 they go through endorsements. The way it's presented, Freedom Works (Dick Army's organization) seems to be the main body of the Tea Party, and give it's support to candidates he likes. But then Steinhouser admits "anyone can run as a member of the Tea Party." He seems to have disavowed O'Donnell, Iott (nazi guy), and Paladino.

Steinhouser says the message of the Tea Party is lower taxes and smaller government. But also says the main point is the deficit/national debt.

Colbert asks point blank about "the gays." Steinhouser's response is to say "'I'll let people have their own opinions."

Good interview, worth watching.

[Shot From Guns]

Really? Is that the first thread of his you've read? Cause there are 750 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/search.php?searchid=5789308) more just like that.

Note, I said "in the last month." I also have no idea what search you tried to link to.

And I do try to make it a policy not to insult individual posters unless they've insulted me first, so if you want to point to the instance where I insulted you, and if it wasn't preceeded by an insult of some sort to me, I would be happy to apologize to you for it.

Oh, look, more lies!

Because it's utterly, uttlery impossible to have a civilized discussion about politics around here that even begins to stray from the liberal party line, with any attempt to do so immediately swamped by twenty posters shouting the most ridiculous kinds of bullshit.

And more. They do just stack up, don't they.

I can't imagine why people would sometimes react to policies based in fear, ignorance, cupidity, and hate in a negative manner, either. Certainly, the only explanation is that liberals are morally bankrupt.

Not quite. Only Sikh men wear dastar, but the word turban refers to any wound headdress, which are common among other South Asian, Middle Eastern and African cultures.

I know. That's why I specified "known for wearing turbans." Sikhism requires a specific headdress that is pretty much what your average American will picture when they hear the word turban; Islam has no such requirement, though there are plenty of primarily Muslim cultures that wear some type of head wrap/drape.

[BrainGlutton]

He also describes the Tea Party as a "centrist movement" and considers Obama to be on the fringe. "We are on the dead center of American Politics."

The studio audience had a good laugh at that!

[emacknight]

He also describes the Tea Party as a "centrist movement" and considers Obama to be on the fringe. "We are on the dead center of American Politics."

The studio audience had a good laugh at that!

Not really surprising. Part of the human condition to assume you're normal and everyone else is on the fringe.

For me, the followup question would be, "are you lying or are you delusional?"

[Strassia]

Since the Tea Party is a diverse movement with many nuanced beliefs, and not a socially conservative group who want to oppose the current Democratic administration without having to address how bad the last Republican administration was, can anyone point to any socially liberal candidates endorsed by any Tea Party group? And by socially liberal, I mean pro SSM, pro-choice, and for repealing DADT, since all three of those are things that reduce government reach into people's private lives and do not increase government spending.


I would like to bump this question. Can anyone answer it? Everywhere I look the Tea Party candidates are socially conservative.

[anya marie]

Let me ask you this: What can the tea party do for me?

Ask not what your tea party can do for you; ask what you can do for your tea party.


Ha ha ha fucking ha. I suppose they want me to stand around with a misspelled sign, like a yutz, while they chip away at my rights.

Way to answer the question, shit-for-brains.

[Really Not All That Bright]

"Negative, Ghost Rider, the pattern is full."
"WHOOSH!"

[Squink]

Everywhere I look the Tea Party candidates are socially conservative.Sheer coinky-dink.
Turns out the socially liberal prospects were all too busy tying their shoe laces to run this election cycle.
But just you wait til nov 2012, Hoo BOY, many Shuvs and Zuuls will know what it is to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!

[Robot Arm]

And I do try to make it a policy not to insult individual posters unless they've insulted me first, so if you want to point to the instance where I insulted you, and if it wasn't preceeded by an insult of some sort to me, I would be happy to apologize to you for it.I'm still waiting.

[Shot From Guns]

Don't hold your breath. He's a fucking liar and he always will be.

[42fish]

And then there's the fact that the board's conservative posters, being the believers in individual responsibility that we are, very, very, rarely come to each other's defense in the first place. We each believe that our brethren can handle their own battles, and we know that that they expect us to do the same. I can't think of a genuine conservative dog pile against a liberal poster in all the time I've been here...or even an attempt at one.

This of course explains why anytime Bricker gets pitted, he has to shoulder the burden alone without any other Doper sticking up for him.

Although it doesn't quite explain how I hallucinated actually participating in threads in which a dozen posters pointed and laughed at gonzomax.

[Robot Arm]

Don't hold your breath. He's a fucking liar and he always will be.Perhaps. I just want everyone to know that I haven't walked away from the issue.

[Merijeek]

Let me ask you this: What can the tea party do for me?


Ask not what your tea party can do for you; ask what you can do for your tea party.

Do something for someone else? And what's in it for me again? Screw you, commie!

-Joe

[Merijeek]

And then there's the fact that the board's conservative posters, being the believers in individual responsibility that we are, very, very, rarely come to each other's defense in the first place. We each believe that our brethren can handle their own battles, and we know that that they expect us to do the same. I can't think of a genuine conservative dog pile against a liberal poster in all the time I've been here...or even an attempt at one.

This of course explains why anytime Bricker gets pitted, he has to shoulder the burden alone without any other Doper sticking up for him.

Although it doesn't quite explain how I hallucinated actually participating in threads in which a dozen posters pointed and laughed at gonzomax.

And remember how we'd all line up like circus seals to blow reeder? It's the librul obligation, ya know.

-Joe

[Guinastasia]

This of course explains why anytime Bricker gets pitted, he has to shoulder the burden alone without any other Doper sticking up for him.

Although it doesn't quite explain how I hallucinated actually participating in threads in which a dozen posters pointed and laughed at gonzomax.

Or why Airman, Jodi, or Ivylass don't get Pitted at all. (Or if they do, it's usually a big fail)


And I do try to make it a policy not to insult individual posters unless they've insulted me first, so if you want to point to the instance where I insulted you, and if it wasn't preceeded by an insult of some sort to me, I would be happy to apologize to you for it.I'm still waiting.

He doesn't have time right now -- he has to go out. But he'll get to you "later on."

(Has he tried that one yet?)

[Merijeek]

I'm still waiting.

He doesn't have time right now -- he has to go out. But he'll get to you "later on."

(Has he tried that one yet?)

Look lady, I don't think you appreciate how much time and dedication it takes to yell at kids to get off the lawn.

-Joe

[Czarcasm]

He doesn't have time right now -- he has to go out. But he'll get to you "later on."

(Has he tried that one yet?)

Look lady, I don't think you appreciate how much time and dedication it takes to yell at kids to get off the lawn.If only he were standing in his own yard instead of the yards of random neighbors.

[emacknight]

Look lady, I don't think you appreciate how much time and dedication it takes to yell at kids to get off the lawn.If only he were standing in his own yard instead of the yards of random neighbors.

You mean the neighbours in houses they can't afford, that were bailed out using his taxes???

[Really Not All That Bright]

This of course explains why anytime Bricker gets pitted, he has to shoulder the burden alone without any other Doper sticking up for him.

Although it doesn't quite explain how I hallucinated actually participating in threads in which a dozen posters pointed and laughed at gonzomax.

Or why Airman, Jodi, or Ivylass don't get Pitted at all. (Or if they do, it's usually a big fail)


I'm still waiting.

He doesn't have time right now -- he has to go out. But he'll get to you "later on."
For $20.

[Robot Arm]

For $20.That was SA's offer in another thread. I've already said in this one that I'm willing to stake that much.

[The Great Sun Jester]

If only he were standing in his own yard instead of the yards of random neighbors.

You mean the neighbours in houses they can't afford, that were bailed out using his taxes???Did private homeowners receive free money to catch up their mortgages? If not then I'm afraid I'm being terribly thick here (a possibility I freely admit).

[Merijeek]

You mean the neighbours in houses they can't afford, that were bailed out using his taxes???Did private homeowners receive free money to catch up their mortgages? If not then I'm afraid I'm being terribly thick here (a possibility I freely admit).

Sean Beck said it, it's got to be true.

-Joe

[emacknight]

You mean the neighbours in houses they can't afford, that were bailed out using his taxes???Did private homeowners receive free money to catch up their mortgages? If not then I'm afraid I'm being terribly thick here (a possibility I freely admit).

I don't know, but that was the issue that caused Santelli to make his famous rant (http://www.google.com/search?q=rick+santelli+rant&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a) on Feb 19th, that is believed to have kick started the Tea Party.

[Bryan Ekers]

So, Starving Artist, can Brendan Steinhouser be fairly considered a tea-party leader?

For that matter, is there anyone who self-identifies as a tea-party member (or sympathizer) whose political views you like and/or respect?

[The Great Sun Jester]

Nice threadkill, Ekers.

[Really Not All That Bright]

You mean the neighbours in houses they can't afford, that were bailed out using his taxes???Did private homeowners receive free money to catch up their mortgages? If not then I'm afraid I'm being terribly thick here (a possibility I freely admit).
Well, sort of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeowners_Affordability_and_Stability_Plan), although nobody gave them money. The government gave lenders money and said, "thou shalt modify thy borrowers' payments".

[Merijeek]

Did private homeowners receive free money to catch up their mortgages? If not then I'm afraid I'm being terribly thick here (a possibility I freely admit).
Well, sort of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeowners_Affordability_and_Stability_Plan), although nobody gave them money. The government gave lenders money and said, "thou shalt modify thy borrowers' payments".

And those deadbeats are why I can't afford to have a Porche and a Hummer in my garage?

GET THE TAR AND FEATHERS, CLETUS!!!!

-Joe

[miss elizabeth]

An unbiased opinion would be useful. I would suggest attending one of the Tea Party rallies, if you feel strongly about it; however, you might be the wrong color to attend one in Mississippi or Memphis. Dey ain't nuttin' but eyes and teeth in da night, baby! Dig?

I live in Mississippi, right outside of Memphis, and i can assure you, the Tea Party is as white here as anywhere else in the country (99+%). Yes, I have seen them with my own two eyes.

[Euphonious Polemic]

An unbiased opinion would be useful. I would suggest attending one of the Tea Party rallies, if you feel strongly about it; however, you might be the wrong color to attend one in Mississippi or Memphis. Dey ain't nuttin' but eyes and teeth in da night, baby! Dig?

I live in Mississippi, right outside of Memphis, and i can assure you, the Tea Party is as white here as anywhere else in the country (99+%). Yes, I have seen them with my own two eyes.

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.

[Shot From Guns]

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.

Well I never.

[Ludovic]

I live in Mississippi, right outside of Memphis, and i can assure you, the Tea Party is as white here as anywhere else in the country (99+%). Yes, I have seen them with my own two eyes.

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.Seems so unlike teabaggers to do that.

[kaylasdad99]

And those deadbeats are why I can't afford to have a Porche and a Hummer in my garage?I don't know what to tell you about the Porche (sic), but it's my experience that having a Hummer in the garage is really a matter of asking your SO really nicely...

[descamisado]

I live in Mississippi, right outside of Memphis, and i can assure you, the Tea Party is as white here as anywhere else in the country (99+%). Yes, I have seen them with my own two eyes.

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.Bless his little heart.

[anya marie]

Porsche Carrera Cabriolet has an MSRP of USD$ 88,800
Porsche Boxter manual is $47, 660 MSRP
Porsche Panamera is $74, 400

I'd buy one myself but there's the money thing and I don't know how to drive a manual transmission.

[Squink]

Well I never.Mercy sakes, Land o' Goshen!

[elucidator]

Well, that's not what the boys down at the pool hall say. Maybe "never on a first date". Maybe.

[SmartAleq]

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.Bless his little heart.

I'll pray for the chile...

[Shot From Guns]

Well, that's not what the boys down at the pool hall say. Maybe "never on a first date". Maybe.

Right, like anybody hanging out at a pool hall could afford me.

[Really Not All That Bright]

To buy, or rent?

[emacknight]

I post like I do because many of the board's liberal posters are arrogant, superior, outrageously partisan jerks.

So what you're saying is it's their fault, not yours. And that you have no control.

And then there's the fact that the board's conservative posters, being the believers in individual responsibility that we are


I declare victory only on rare occasion, and never in order to run off to do it in another thread.

You do it in most of the threads you've participated in. I think you did it three times in the Death Panel thread.

There are no lies there to answer for.

Just to get you started, there is this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=580311) that you started then ran away from.


And the requested cite, which was for instances of liberal sources talking about creationism vs. evolution, thus creating the impression in many people's minds that evolution is alleged to be the scientific counterpoint to creationism with regard to how life on earth came into being. There is absolutely no question that for many decades liberals have been laughing at creationists and pointing to evolution as the alternative explanation for life, usually claiming that while evolution doesn't have all the answers as to how life began, it's at least pointing the way (which also explains why so many people refer to the "theory of evolution", another term that liberals are largely responsible for creating but which they now laugh at people for mentioning.)

So if there is no question, and it's been happening for decades, why weren't you able to come up with a cite? You've once again stated it as fact, but can't back it up. Would you like to apologize and and admit that this is just your opinion? And that once again you're opinion is based on your fucked up perception of reality, combined with your inability to understand what evolution is?


It may not have been the search phrase for what I was supposed to be looking for as redefined by my opponents, but it was the correct search phrase for what I was talking about and originally said.

Did it hurt when you were moving those goal posts? Someone of your age should be more careful.


I make a simple observation to the effect that the Tea Party has no central leadership or spokesman and look what a clusterfuck the ignorance-fighting liberals of the SDMB have turned this simple, accurate statement into.

If only that was what you did. Glad to see it's still those nasty liberals at fault. So much for conservatives taking responsibility. Just another of the many lies.

[Shot From Guns]

To buy, or rent?

Yes.

[elucidator]

And your policy on charitable donation?

[gonzomax]

How come every Tea Partier who makes an offensive remark gets labeled a "champion" or "hero" of the Tea Party around here? The Tea Party is made up of millions of people with a wide range of opinions, beliefs, backgrounds, education and income levels. But let one person at a Tea Party rally or one candidate say something offensive, or foolish, or hold up a wrongly worded sign, and immediately they become the personification of the Tea Party.

Why is that, I facetiously wonder?

Not millions. No where near that. But the ones who speak for them and the ones who are running for office are fuckin goofballs. You have Palin, Angle, Paladino.,Bachmann, O'Donnell and others who can not be explained away. They are the tea baggers leaders. They are jokes.
One candidate says something stupid or offensive. You kid. They are running an assembly line of ignorance. It is their cash crop.

[Starving Artist]

Not millions. No where near that.Oh, I don't know. On average a million would be only 20,000 per state and I would imagine their numbers are considerably larger than that, especially when it comes to votership in major elections. I could be wrong, of course, but it looks like the Tea Party is wielding influence way out of proportion to its numbers if so.

[elucidator]

It gathers attention far outside of its numbers, by the grace of the self-same MSM you bewail, bemoan and bepiss.

Notice how quickly they got all organized? Web sites, professional fund raising, press releases. Its almost as if a mass of professional political operatives made it up out of whole cloth. And those people don't work cheap. Boy howdy, those Tea Partiers sure raised a bunch of money in a big-ass hurry, didn't they, just passing the hat at local grassroots gatherings!

Inquiring minds want to know about that? Or are inquiring minds easily....ooh! shiny!

[Plan B]

Survey of signs at Tea Party Rallies (http://http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/14/cant-you-read-the-signs)

[villa]

OK - so a libertarian web site says its not racist. Guess that ends any discussion.

[Guinastasia]

Hey -- does anyone remember Wildest Bill? I'll bet you any amount of money he's not only a VERY enthusiastic Tea-Partier but a Birther as well.

Survey of signs at Tea Party Rallies (http://http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/14/cant-you-read-the-signs)

Fixed link (http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/14/cant-you-read-the-signs)

[Plan B]

OK - so a libertarian web site says its not racist. Guess that ends any discussion.No actually, if you had taken the time to read beyond the heading you would see that the research was done by a grad student at UCLA, Emily Elkins. Then it was reported by the Washington Post.

It is to WaPo's credit that they are daring to depart from the liberal script about what the Tea Party is.

And Guinastasia thanks for fixing the link

[elucidator]

So, that's what happened to Victoria Jackson

[Snowboarder Bo]

So, a person did a survey of signs at ONE Tea Party rally, and it just happens to be the rally where they were specifically told NOT to bring crazy racist signs, and the survey found that most people did not bring those types of signs they were asked not to bring (because having them would look bad).

And we're supposed to take this as evidence that the Tea Party isn't racist? After all the other rallies, where such signs were in such abundance, that the people coming to the rally in September had to be asked not to bring them?

Are you out of your fucking mind?

I'll accept it as evidence that the people at that rally didn't bring those signs, but that's about all. When come back, bring real facts and a preponderance of evidence. Not pictures from a staged event (the event I'm talking about being: "Keep your racism on the downlow! Leave the 'nigger' signs at home!").

[BigT]

I don't think SA is wrong. The Tea Party is very loosely organized. There's a lot that people seem to agree on, but there does not seem to be any true leaders, at least, none that are not operating in the shadows.

But we're making a mistake here. We don't need a leader. We just need someone who is considered to be representative of the group's views. And that by definition would be the people they are voting for to operate in our representational government. Figure out what they have in common, and those are the views. It works for all political groups.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe there are many times that SA has engaged in less than well-formed arguments, and would likely benefit from a difference in style. But that does make everything he says inherently wrong. In fact, there usually is some point, even if it is not argued well.

[Robot Arm]

I don't think SA is wrong. The Tea Party is very loosely organized. There's a lot that people seem to agree on, but there does not seem to be any true leaders, at least,...If that's true, then what's the point? Democrats and Republicans, for all their faults, at least stand for something. They accept and expel members, they raise funds and support their campaigns, they hold primaries to select candidates, they debate, write, and release a platform statement, and the results of all this can be tracked by their public disclosures and by the voting records of their members.

The Tea Party, to the point that anyone can even discuss what unites them, is angry at the government. They want to hold the members of the government accountable for some perceived failings or mismanagement. At the same time, we're told that none of them are accountable for anything. It's like nailing Jello to a tree. Come on, guys, grow a pair and step up to the plate. You want to play with the big boys? Fine, tell me where you stand.

Or else what the hell is the Tea Party?

[Morella]

That's all I'm going on, what you've posted here. That's kinda what happens on message boards. Maybe in real life you're an intelligent, well spoken, un-prejudiced brain surgeon with a 7 figure income. But here, on this message board, you appear to be an ignorant, prejudiced fuckwit who is wasting my time.

I hate to bring up the dreaded R-word in an environment that is infested by liberals, but you are the one who is responsible for what you do with your time, not me.

You ever see Monsters Inc.? There's a throw away line where two monsters are making a bit of a fools of themselves, and one turns to the other and tells him "You're making it worse!!!!"

I bought the DVD for my 6-year-old daughter, and she seemed to be enjoying it, but I must confess that I wasn't really watching it. Why were you watching it?

[Morella]

Since the Tea Party is a diverse movement with many nuanced beliefs, and not a socially conservative group who want to oppose the current Democratic administration without having to address how bad the last Republican administration was, can anyone point to any socially liberal candidates endorsed by any Tea Party group?

Do you ever engage the brain? The Tea Party is a diverse movement, yes, but it does have one central focus, which is getting rid of big government and waste. That is not a partisan issue.

[Morella]

Enter the Tea Party, with the message...we need conservatives, not necessarily Republicans in Congress. I have no argument with that.
To put a stop to the dreaded homosexual agenda, right?

There is where I part company with the Tea Partiers. Actually, religion is where I draw the line. It is amazing, to me, how quickly a conservative can go from making sense, talking about responsibility, work ethic, and freedom, to babbling about religion and abortion, coming across as a total moron. If they could just leave the religion and abortion out of their agenda, the rest of the message would probably sell. As for the racism, there are a few assholes in every crowd.

[Morella]

Granted, I can see how the "diaperhead" comment would be insulting to some people, especially people like my grandparents, but what the hell...they're dead.

You think your grandparents would be honored that you said this? (snip)

I would think that the "what the hell, they're dead" comment would explain this. It doesn't matter whether they would be honored or not. They are dead.

I just don't get the coolness factor of dissing your blood relatives. How cool would be if your grand-kids called you "sand-nigger?"

I would tell them, that's "dune coon" to you. Silly person, I am far above being offended by name-calling.

[Morella]

Let me ask you this: What can the tea party do for me?

Can you help me get a job? What can you offer me that i cannnot get from democrats?

What sort of handout are you looking for?

Why are you now pitching a bitch that Obama wants to end wars we AS A COUNTRY can't afford, end tax cuts we cannnot afford (snip)

Obama wants to end wars? Who was the last politician who did not say, "I want to end this war and bring our troops home?" Would that be Reagan?

As for "tax cuts we cannot afford"...I'm a small business owner, getting ready to send in my taxes (yeah, I know they're late, they'll send me a bill for that later). If I did not have to send this money to the IRS, to be wasted, flushed down the toilet, I could hire more employees this year. Do you understand why a tax cut might help with the unemployment situation? Cut my taxes in half right now and I will give you a job. Government can do nothing but leech money from the economy. They cannot give you anything. They can only take. The answer to finding a job, and everything else that you need, is within you. You don't need the government, your mother, or Jesus Christ to do it for you. Take some initiative, educate yourself, take a bath, dress up nice, put down the fucking bong, and make something of yourself! Once you are successful, you can pick up the bong and fuck off again...that's exactly what I intend to do.

What's up with your extreme pro-life agenda? What gives you the right to tell me how i have to spend my money, and why do i have to lose access to birth control because you don't approve of it?

How are you going to lose access to birth control? Are they taking the condom racks out of the convenience stores or what?

[Morella]

I live in Mississippi, right outside of Memphis, and i can assure you, the Tea Party is as white here as anywhere else in the country (99+%). Yes, I have seen them with my own two eyes.

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.

I would humbly suggest that you be specific about what facts I have misrepresented, and what facts you have to refute them. I posted several links about the black tea party, and no one has refuted any of the material.

[Morella]

Survey of signs at Tea Party Rallies (http://http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/14/cant-you-read-the-signs)

That is a good link, fixed:

http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/14/cant-you-read-the-signs

[Fear Itself]

As for "tax cuts we cannot afford"...I'm a small business owner, getting ready to send in my taxes (yeah, I know they're late, they'll send me a bill for that later). If I did not have to send this money to the IRS, to be wasted, flushed down the toilet, I could hire more employees this year. Bullshit. If you hire new employees just because you get a tax cut, you are a very poor businessman. Most businesses have plenty of capital to hire employees, but they lack demand for their products. What is the point of hiring employees if you don't have enough work for the ones you have now? Tax cuts do not spur hiring, consumer demand does. We have had tax cuts for the wealthy for almost ten years now; where are all the jobs you say should have been created? Why didn't the Bush tax cuts work the first time around? Why should we increase the deficit to line the pockets of corporations that aren't going to hire anybody anyway? Tax cuts are just a give away to the wealthy.

[DianaG]

Once you are successful, you can pick up the bong and fuck off again...that's exactly what I intend to do.
Seems like you might be getting a bit of a head start.

[Snowboarder Bo]

As for "tax cuts we cannot afford"...I'm a small business owner, getting ready to send in my taxes (yeah, I know they're late, they'll send me a bill for that later). If I did not have to send this money to the IRS, to be wasted, flushed down the toilet, I could hire more employees this year. Bullshit. If you hire new employees just because you get a tax cut, you are a very poor businessman. Most businesses have plenty of capital to hire employees, but they lack demand for their products. What is the point of hiring employees if you don't have enough work for the ones you have now? Tax cuts do not spur hiring, consumer demand does. We have had tax cuts for the wealthy for almost ten years now; where are all the jobs you say should have been created? Why didn't the Bush tax cuts work the first time around? Why should we increase the deficit to line the pockets of corporations that aren't going to hire anybody anyway? Tax cuts are just a give away to the wealthy.

Exactly. If tax cuts are what will cause more people to get hired by more businesses, why didn't we have a net job gain during the Bush administrations, when the tax cuts were in effect? It's all a lie, is why.

[SteveG1]

Bullshit. If you hire new employees just because you get a tax cut, you are a very poor businessman. Most businesses have plenty of capital to hire employees, but they lack demand for their products. What is the point of hiring employees if you don't have enough work for the ones you have now? Tax cuts do not spur hiring, consumer demand does. We have had tax cuts for the wealthy for almost ten years now; where are all the jobs you say should have been created? Why didn't the Bush tax cuts work the first time around? Why should we increase the deficit to line the pockets of corporations that aren't going to hire anybody anyway? Tax cuts are just a give away to the wealthy.

Exactly. If tax cuts are what will cause more people to get hired by more businesses, why didn't we have a net job gain during the Bush administrations, when the tax cuts were in effect? It's all a lie, is why.

Go further back in time to Reagan and his Reaganomics trickle down theory - that the benefits of "corporate hand outs" would trickle down to everyone. It was a spectacular failure. Nothing trickled down.

[SteveG1]

Obama wants to end wars? Who was the last politician who did not say, "I want to end this war and bring our troops home?" Would that be Reagan?MY guess would be Nixon, when he called it quits in Viet Nam (?) not Reagan.

[SteveG1]

An interesting note: Steinhouser describes the movement starting in the fall of 2008 to protest TARP started by then Pres. Bush. But then admits no one gave a shit until the spring after Obama took office.

Blames the government for the rise in house prices.


There we go. No one cared until Obama. Then suddenly, on the day he "moved in" the world ended. Partisan bullshit. Bush was one of them, a :god told me what to do" rightist supposedly conservative Repub. But that was OK. It was only when Obama got in (he WAS elected) that suddenly it changed to "we gotta get the country back". I call bullshit on the Tea Baggers.

[villa]

OK - so a libertarian web site says its not racist. Guess that ends any discussion.No actually, if you had taken the time to read beyond the heading you would see that the research was done by a grad student at UCLA, Emily Elkins. Then it was reported by the Washington Post.

It is to WaPo's credit that they are daring to depart from the liberal script about what the Tea Party is.

And Guinastasia thanks for fixing the link

Ohhhh - I read the article you linked to. I assumed if you were talking about the study you would have linked to the WaPo article, rather than the woowoo one.

And yes, I agree with it. Every tea party rally I have seen has more "economic" signs than racist ones. So what? That there is even a significant minority of race based ones says a hell of a lot. And that the "small government" theme wasn't considered relevant when it was a big white run government does as well.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Exactly. If tax cuts are what will cause more people to get hired by more businesses, why didn't we have a net job gain during the Bush administrations, when the tax cuts were in effect? It's all a lie, is why.

Go further back in time to Reagan and his Reaganomics trickle down theory - that the benefits of "corporate hand outs" would trickle down to everyone. It was a spectacular failure. Nothing trickled down.
Well, except cocaine.

[Euphonious Polemic]

I would humbly suggest that poster Morella has misrepresented factual information in order to advance an agenda.

I would humbly suggest that you be specific about what facts I have misrepresented, and what facts you have to refute them. I posted several links about the black tea party, and no one has refuted any of the material.

You implied that tea Party membership in the south was representative of the population in that it includes a number of visible minorities. Or, to put it in your more colorful vernacular:
An unbiased opinion would be useful. I would suggest attending one of the Tea Party rallies, if you feel strongly about it; however, you might be the wrong color to attend one in Mississippi or Memphis. Dey ain't nuttin' but eyes and teeth in da night, baby! Dig?

Well, miss elizabeth has given you a first hand account of a Tea Party rally in Memphis, and has reported that it is as white here as anywhere else in the country (99+%).

This indicates that you are very, very wrong about the racial makeup of this group. Your agenda is that you want to convince us that the Tea Party are just a regular sample of the population whose only concern is the economy.

[SteveG1]

Go further back in time to Reagan and his Reaganomics trickle down theory - that the benefits of "corporate hand outs" would trickle down to everyone. It was a spectacular failure. Nothing trickled down.
Well, except cocaine.

When your day is done and you wanna run on ...

[Merijeek]

An interesting note: Steinhouser describes the movement starting in the fall of 2008 to protest TARP started by then Pres. Bush. But then admits no one gave a shit until the spring after Obama took office.

Blames the government for the rise in house prices.


There we go. No one cared until Obama. Then suddenly, on the day he "moved in" the world ended. Partisan bullshit. Bush was one of them, a :god told me what to do" rightist supposedly conservative Repub. But that was OK. It was only when Obama got in (he WAS elected) that suddenly it changed to "we gotta get the country back". I call bullshit on the Tea Baggers.

Well, sure. It's not THEIR fault that a Democrat one-of-those-people got elected. They voted AGAINST him. Is it their fault everyone voted wrong?

-Joe

[Plan B]

No actually, if you had taken the time to read beyond the heading you would see that the research was done by a grad student at UCLA, Emily Elkins. Then it was reported by the Washington Post.

It is to WaPo's credit that they are daring to depart from the liberal script about what the Tea Party is.

And Guinastasia thanks for fixing the link

Ohhhh - I read the article you linked to. I assumed if you were talking about the study you would have linked to the WaPo article, rather than the woowoo one.

And yes, I agree with it. Every tea party rally I have seen has more "economic" signs than racist ones. So what? That there is even a significant minority of race based ones says a hell of a lot. And that the "small government" theme wasn't considered relevant when it was a big white run government does as well.

Where is the evidence that there is a significant minority of race based signs at Tea Parties? A sign that insults Obama is not race based any more than a sign insulting Cheney is race based. Cite please for that significant minority.

About that second point, no I don't think that small government , libertarian thinking started on January 20, 2009:

Old Libertarian Book (http://http://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman/dp/0156334607/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1287155675&sr=1-3)

Reprint of Libertarian Book from 1944 (http://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Documents---Definitive-Collected/dp/0226320553/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1287155774&sr=1-1)

[BrainGlutton]

Not millions. No where near that.Oh, I don't know. On average a million would be only 20,000 per state and I would imagine their numbers are considerably larger than that, especially when it comes to votership in major elections. I could be wrong, of course, but it looks like the Tea Party is wielding influence way out of proportion to its numbers if so.

Does that surprise you? Vocal minorities can wield influence out of proportion to their numbers -- that is the whole point of being a vocal minority, the whole point of rallies and demonstrations and organizing and media attention. It is not just to secure the votes of everyone who shows up at the rallies, they'll all vote and all vote the same way anyway.

[villa]

Where is the evidence that there is a significant minority of race based signs at Tea Parties? A sign that insults Obama is not race based any more than a sign insulting Cheney is race based. Cite please for that significant minority.

I consider any birther stuff or Obama is a Muslim stuff to be race based.

About that second point, no I don't think that small government , libertarian thinking started on January 20, 2009:

Old Libertarian Book (http://http://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman/dp/0156334607/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1287155675&sr=1-3)

Reprint of Libertarian Book from 1944 (http://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Documents---Definitive-Collected/dp/0226320553/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1287155774&sr=1-1)

Wow - thanks for the book recommendations. The point was that these Tea Partiers had not a single care about "small government" while Dubs was spending like a drunken sailor (incidently much of it on killing dusky people, the rest on lining the pockets of his cronies). It seems to only be an issue once someone got all uppity with ideas above his station and moved into the White House.

Small government 'thought' didn't start in January, 2009. But caring about it did for the majority of the teabaggers.

[elucidator]

Oh, I'm sure they did, because "small government" is a buzz word wrapped in a vacuum, it means precisely whatever you want it to. It means getting the government of your back, lowering taxes on all manner of needless stuff, "needless stuff" being another term of art that will be defined at some later date.

"Small government" is the vaporware of politics, it is that thing that has never been but as soon as it is, it will be totally wonderful.

[mhendo]

If I did not have to send this money to the IRS, to be wasted, flushed down the toilet, I could hire more employees this year. Do you understand why a tax cut might help with the unemployment situation? Cut my taxes in half right now and I will give you a job. This would only be true if you are an employer who hires people simply out of a desire to see them have a job.

If, on the other hand, you're like most employers, and you hire the number of people you need to maximize your profit, then you're spouting complete bullshit. If another employee would increase your company's profitability, you would hire that person right now. And if the presence of another employee would not increase your company's profitability, then you won't hire someone, even if you do get a tax cut.

I wouldn't blame you for this. If i were a small business owner, and i got a tax cut, there's no way i'd use it to hire someone just for the hell of it. I'd pocket the money. And if my business profitability would be improved by hiring a new employee, i'd do that whether or not there was a tax cut because more profit is good for the business and for me, even if it's being taxed.

[Euphonious Polemic]

Oh, I'm sure they did, because "small government" is a buzz word wrapped in a vacuum, it means precisely whatever you want it to. It means getting the government of your back, lowering taxes on all manner of needless stuff, "needless stuff" being another term of art that will be defined at some later date.

"Small government" is the vaporware of politics, it is that thing that has never been but as soon as it is, it will be totally wonderful.

I can't define small government, but I will know what it is when I see it.

Some examples of waste:
A freeway in a part of the country I do not use
A government program that I do not use
Research funded by the government that I do not understand
Offices for politicians I do not agree with
Any government office or department that does not directly benefit me right now
Regulations in any way shape or form that do not directly impact me right now
Any government department whose function I do not understand
Government payouts to anyone other than me or my family or my employer

Simple, right?

[Squink]

King James has the right of it:
Ye shall know them by their candidates. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

[Strassia]

Since the Tea Party is a diverse movement with many nuanced beliefs, and not a socially conservative group who want to oppose the current Democratic administration without having to address how bad the last Republican administration was, can anyone point to any socially liberal candidates endorsed by any Tea Party group? And by socially liberal, I mean pro SSM, pro-choice, and for repealing DADT, since all three of those are things that reduce government reach into people's private lives and do not increase government spending.

Not millions. No where near that.Oh, I don't know. On average a million would be only 20,000 per state and I would imagine their numbers are considerably larger than that, especially when it comes to votership in major elections. I could be wrong, of course, but it looks like the Tea Party is wielding influence way out of proportion to its numbers if so.

I bumped my question for the second time to see if you or anyone else will answer it this time. If they Tea Party is not a socially conservative movement, why do they only endorse social conservatives?

I don't think SA is wrong. The Tea Party is very loosely organized. There's a lot that people seem to agree on, but there does not seem to be any true leaders, at least, none that are not operating in the shadows.

But we're making a mistake here. We don't need a leader. We just need someone who is considered to be representative of the group's views. And that by definition would be the people they are voting for to operate in our representational government. Figure out what they have in common, and those are the views. It works for all political groups.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe there are many times that SA has engaged in less than well-formed arguments, and would likely benefit from a difference in style. But that does make everything he says inherently wrong. In fact, there usually is some point, even if it is not argued well.

I am not sure what you are arguing against. The contention put forth by me is that we should judge them by the people they endorse. If the candidates they endorsed were all fiscally conservative, but only 75% where socially conservative, I would accept that they are only a fiscal movement. But, so far as I have seen Rand Paul is the most socially liberal Tea Party endorsement. And that indicates that these separate, supposedly diverse, groups are just as united on social issues as fiscal ones.

Since the Tea Party is a diverse movement with many nuanced beliefs, and not a socially conservative group who want to oppose the current Democratic administration without having to address how bad the last Republican administration was, can anyone point to any socially liberal candidates endorsed by any Tea Party group?

Do you ever engage the brain? The Tea Party is a diverse movement, yes, but it does have one central focus, which is getting rid of big government and waste. That is not a partisan issue.

Can you read for comprehension? I am asking, if its only focus is getting rid of government waste, why are all the candidates it endorses socially conservative? Is everyone who is fiscally conservative also socially conservative? Is gay marriage government waste? Since when did abortion laws have an effect on the deficit? DADT seems to cost the government money, shouldn't they support repealing it? Or has this purportedly fiscal movement been taken over by social conservatives? If this movement is based solely on fiscal issues, where are the socially tolerant candidates?

[emacknight]

King James has the right of it:
Ye shall know them by their candidates. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Deep.

Does anyone else remember when Obama was accused of "palling around with terrorists"? Who was it that said that?

[emacknight]

I bumped my question for the second time to see if you or anyone else will answer it this time. If they Tea Party is not a socially conservative movement, why do they only endorse social conservatives?

You keep asking, but seriously, who else are they going to endorse, liberals?

According to Starving Artist, liberals can't be trusted. They make the country worse, and have been for 80 years now.

[Euphonious Polemic]

I bumped my question for the second time to see if you or anyone else will answer it this time. If they Tea Party is not a socially conservative movement, why do they only endorse social conservatives?

You keep asking, but seriously, who else are they going to endorse, liberals?

According to Starving Artist, liberals can't be trusted. They make the country worse, and have been for 80 years now.

And we know that the liberals make the country worse because:

They are liberals. Q.E.D.

[BrainGlutton]

Since the Tea Party is a diverse movement with many nuanced beliefs, and not a socially conservative group who want to oppose the current Democratic administration without having to address how bad the last Republican administration was, can anyone point to any socially liberal candidates endorsed by any Tea Party group?

Do you ever engage the brain? The Tea Party is a diverse movement, yes, but it does have one central focus, which is getting rid of big government and waste. That is not a partisan issue.

Of course it's a partisan issue. Has not the GOP consistently pretended to be all about that ever since Reagan?

[Euphonious Polemic]

I blame the deficit on Obama for getting the country embroiled in an un-winnable war in Iraq in the first place.

(What? You KNOW that it's going to be said eventually, and a significant proportion of right-wingers will come to accept it as the gospel truth.)

[Strassia]

I bumped my question for the second time to see if you or anyone else will answer it this time. If they Tea Party is not a socially conservative movement, why do they only endorse social conservatives?

You keep asking, but seriously, who else are they going to endorse, liberals?

According to Starving Artist, liberals can't be trusted. They make the country worse, and have been for 80 years now.

Then just admit that the tea party is a standard, hard right, conservative back lash to a Democratic administration and Congress, rather than a ground swell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility of the last ten years. My contention is the whole point of the current tea party movement, on a large scale is to get Republicans in office without having to address what happened the last time they were in Congress.

Even the main Republicans are doing it. Eric Canto was on the Daily Show (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-october-12-2010/eric-cantor) this week and, while I enjoyed a lot of the discussion they had, his pitch to put Republicans back in charge came down to "We screwed up last time, but we learned our lesson and will do better next time." The tea party goes one better and says "that wasn't us, we are different group, and if we appear exactly the same an push the same policies, well that is just a weird coincidence."

[Squink]

My contention is the whole point of the current tea party movement, on a large scale is to get Republicans in office without having to address what happened the last time they were in Congress.To say nothing of dodging responsibility for that near trillion dollar debacle they fomented in in Iraq, and SHOVED DOWN OUR THROATS!
They wouldn't want to have to take responsibility for that, now would they?

[Death of Rats]

There we go. No one cared until Obama. Then suddenly, on the day he "moved in" the world ended. Partisan bullshit. Bush was one of them, a :god told me what to do" rightist supposedly conservative Repub. But that was OK. It was only when Obama got in (he WAS elected) that suddenly it changed to "we gotta get the country back". I call bullshit on the Tea Baggers.

Well, sure. It's not THEIR fault that a Democrat one-of-those-people got elected. They voted AGAINST him. Is it their fault everyone voted wrong?

-Joe

Considering that their side offered up John McCain and Caribou Barbie as an alternative I would say they do hold a large measure of responsibility, yes. Obama was by far the best option given to us.

[Merijeek]

You keep asking, but seriously, who else are they going to endorse, liberals?

According to Starving Artist, liberals can't be trusted. They make the country worse, and have been for 80 years now.

And we know that the liberals make the country worse because:

They are liberals. Q.E.D.

Keep your French out of our country, you god damned commie.

-Joe

[Starving Artist]

Then just admit that the tea party is a standard, hard right, conservative back lash to a Democratic administration and Congress, rather than a ground swell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility of the last ten years."IMO (in my opinion, remember) the Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades, and was touched off by Obama and Congress with the stimulous, the bailouts and its accompanying government control of business, and the health care plan. Someone upthread questioned why the Tea Party seems to have sprung up the day Obama got into office, and my opinion is that to the degree this is true, it's because of the aggressive and arrogant way Obama and Congress began to govern virtually from the day he took office.

And to answer your question from further upthread, I don't believe I've ever said the Tea Party wasn't also socially conservative.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Aggressive? After the previous administration started a ridiculous war just for kicks?

[Jack Batty]

Aggressive? After the previous administration started a ridiculous war just for kicks?

Which, by the way, pissed away trillions of dollars and got us into the world of budget deficits in the first place. Whence the Tea Party then when fiscal irresponsipility wasn't just a slogan it was a plan?

[Euphonious Polemic]

IMO (in my opinion, remember) the Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades, and was touched off by Obama and Congress with the stimulous, the bailouts and its accompanying government control of business, and the health care plan.

Quiz question: Who signed TARP into law on October 3, 2008?

Bonus round: Who was president during the beginning of the economic recession in the United States in December 2007?

[Plan B]

Where is the evidence that there is a significant minority of race based signs at Tea Parties? A sign that insults Obama is not race based any more than a sign insulting Cheney is race based. Cite please for that significant minority.

I consider any birther stuff or Obama is a Muslim stuff to be race based.

About that second point, no I don't think that small government , libertarian thinking started on January 20, 2009:

Old Libertarian Book (http://http://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman/dp/0156334607/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1287155675&sr=1-3)

Reprint of Libertarian Book from 1944 (http://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Documents---Definitive-Collected/dp/0226320553/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1287155774&sr=1-1)

Wow - thanks for the book recommendations. The point was that these Tea Partiers had not a single care about "small government" while Dubs was spending like a drunken sailor (incidently much of it on killing dusky people, the rest on lining the pockets of his cronies). It seems to only be an issue once someone got all uppity with ideas above his station and moved into the White House.

Small government 'thought' didn't start in January, 2009. But caring about it did for the majority of the teabaggers.No need to be so snarky. They weren't recommendations, they were cites.

[Knorf]

...Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades, and was touched off by Obama and Congress with the stimulous, the bailouts and its accompanying government control of business, and the health care plan.

You are aware, I hope, that this "stimulous" was first signed into law by G.W. Bush.

You're just a partisan hack. What businesses does the Gov't now "control" under Obama? Please be specific.

Please present an argument showing how letting the Big Three automakers go under without assistance would have been better for America.

The Health Care plan? You mean, the one that uses (originally) mostly Republican ideas?

You're a moron.

[Starving Artist]

A sign that insults Obama is not race based any more than a sign insulting Cheney is race based. Cite please for that significant minority.

I consider any birther stuff or Obama is a Muslim stuff to be race based.How convenient for you. To most of us, though, "Muslim" isn't a race but a religion, and the question of birth relates to his qualification to hold office as set forth in the Constitution.

So if you want to consider those to be "race based", you are obviously doing so only in a dishonest attempt to paint as racist a group you simply disagree with politically.

And that's really not very sporting of you, if I do say so myself.

[Robot Arm]

IMO (in my opinion, remember) the Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades,...How many decades are you talking about, anyway?

This country has not been run by a single, consistent policy over that time span. Parties come into, and out of power. Three decades is a number that works for me; that's about when I became eligible to vote and started paying attention to the issues. It's also the beginning of the Reagan Revolution. During that time, one party has clearly been more fiscally irresponsible. Anyone care to guess which one?

When people try to lump the decades together, it looks like an attempt to avoid taking responsibility for the very real shifts in power that happened during those decades.

But then, that's just my opinion.

[mhendo]

No need to be so snarky. They weren't recommendations, they were cites.What was your comment about the start of libertarian thinking, if not snarky?

Look, i'm not a libertarian, but i'm well aware of the classical liberal tradition and of the libertarian movement that took much of its inspiration from that tradition. I've read Hayek and Friedman. Hell, i've even tortured myself with Ludwig von Mises. I've received fellowships from a libertarian organization, and attended libertarian conferences where i, as a social democrat, was somewhat out of place.

Even when i don't agree with libertarians, i find that many of them have clear, well-thought-out arguments about the nature and acceptable limits of state authority, and i also appreciate that the libertarians i've come into contact with have generally been happy to debate me honestly and fairly on issues where we disagree. It's also clear to me that many libertarians do truly care about the poor and downtrodden in society, and that in most cases they don't call for cuts to government programs out of simple spite.

But, in all the coverage i've seen of the Tea Party movement, even in cases where members of the movement have been shown speaking for themselves about their own beliefs, i have seen none of the intellectual rigor and thoughtfulness that tends to characterize the libertarians i've had dealings with in the past. What i have seen is lots of shouting about getting government off our backs combined, in many cases, with a level of religious and socially prescriptive and proscriptive arguments that are completely out of line with libertarian ideas regarding non-coercion and individual liberty.

The Tea Party movement has many full-blooded, genuine religious conservatives who probably do genuinely want reduced government interference in certain areas of the economy, but who have no sustained or consistent libertarian argument, and who seem happy for the government to keep its nose right in people's business on certain social and cultural issues.

While libertarians do not constitute a monolithic group, and there were debates among libertarians over things like foreign policy, one thing that did characterize the arguments of many actual libertarian organizations like the Cato Institute during the Bush administration was a strong criticism of Bush's spending policies, and of his overweening and intrusive legislation on a whole bunch of issues related to personal freedom.

But most of these Tea Party douchebags seemed to have no interest in such libertarian critiques 5 or 6 years ago, and that is why they have no credibility, the whining sophistry of [b]Starving Artist[/i] and other mendacious morons notwithstanding. I know a few libertarians who agree with some of the Tea Party's general calls for smaller government, but who also keep their distance because they recognize that these positions are often not rooted in any sustained or genuine critique of government power or spending, but in a conservative opposition only to particular types of government spending, and to particular party-political positions.

[Strassia]

Then just admit that the tea party is a standard, hard right, conservative back lash to a Democratic administration and Congress, rather than a ground swell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility of the last ten years."IMO (in my opinion, remember) the Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades, and was touched off by Obama and Congress with the stimulous, the bailouts and its accompanying government control of business, and the health care plan. Someone upthread questioned why the Tea Party seems to have sprung up the day Obama got into office, and my opinion is that to the degree this is true, it's because of the aggressive and arrogant way Obama and Congress began to govern virtually from the day he took office.

And to answer your question from further upthread, I don't believe I've ever said the Tea Party wasn't also socially conservative.

Then what are you in this thread for? The OPs whole point was that the tea party groups present themselves as a movement for fiscal responsibility that embrace anyone who is for reducing deficits from either side of the political spectrum, but every candidate they support seems to be a far right social conservative (and often a loon to boot). You seemed to be arguing that we were taking these out of context and only noticing the socially conservative and loony.

So what was your point? If you agree that they are actually an overall socially conservative group, what are you arguing against?

[John Mace]

IMO (in my opinion, remember) the Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades, and was touched off by Obama and Congress with the stimulous, the bailouts and its accompanying government control of business, and the health care plan. Someone upthread questioned why the Tea Party seems to have sprung up the day Obama got into office, and my opinion is that to the degree this is true, it's because of the aggressive and arrogant way Obama and Congress began to govern virtually from the day he took office.

And to answer your question from further upthread, I don't believe I've ever said the Tea Party wasn't also socially conservative.

Then what are you in this thread for? The OPs whole point was that the tea party groups present themselves as a movement for fiscal responsibility that embrace anyone who is for reducing deficits from either side of the political spectrum, but every candidate they support seems to be a far right social conservative (and often a loon to boot). You seemed to be arguing that we were taking these out of context and only noticing the socially conservative and loony.

So what was your point? If you agree that they are actually an overall socially conservative group, what are you arguing against?

Tea Partiers not only want to reduce the deficit, but they also want to reduce the size of the federal government. You're not going to get many (any?) Democrats signing up for that.

[Frank]

Tea Partiers not only want to reduce the deficit, but they also want to reduce the size of the federal government. You're not going to get many (any?) Democrats signing up for that.
While that's true enough, it doesn't mean that the Tea Partiers are Libertarians or even traditional fiscal conservatives. Where were they when the previous administration decided to start two wars and cut taxes? I didn't hear much of, "We're fighting two wars, we have to pay for them somehow."

The much-maligned and woefully too small stimulus is a drop in the bucket compared to the two wars that we have run off the theory of . . . well, shit, y'know John, I can't even imagine what theory the previous administration had in mind to pay for the wars. Where were the deficit hawks then?

[Euphonious Polemic]

I can't even imagine what theory the previous administration had in mind to pay for the wars. Where were the deficit hawks then?

You know, I am quite convinced that the plan that the previous administration had was this:

"When the Democrats are in power, they will have to pay for the mess then. They'll have to either cut services or raise taxes, and when they do, we'll hammer them as hard as we can. If they do neither, we'll hammer them on the rising deficit"

[villa]

No need to be so snarky. They weren't recommendations, they were cites.

I was snarky because I never said libertarianism was a theory of the 21st century, nor implied it. And by posting cites to two turgid texts like that you were the one being snarky.

[Strassia]

Then what are you in this thread for? The OPs whole point was that the tea party groups present themselves as a movement for fiscal responsibility that embrace anyone who is for reducing deficits from either side of the political spectrum, but every candidate they support seems to be a far right social conservative (and often a loon to boot). You seemed to be arguing that we were taking these out of context and only noticing the socially conservative and loony.

So what was your point? If you agree that they are actually an overall socially conservative group, what are you arguing against?

Tea Partiers not only want to reduce the deficit, but they also want to reduce the size of the federal government. You're not going to get many (any?) Democrats signing up for that.

Quite a few might like to reduce the military budget. Others would like to reduce corporate subsidies. No one wants a bigger government just to have a bigger government. Liberal's and Conservatives just see different parts of the government as too big or too small.

This is also the case with regulation as well. Conservatives tend to want to regulate what individuals do (flag burning, gay marriage, abortion, etc.) while liberals tend to want to regulate what business do. There are very few true libertarians who want less government across the board, and the tea party movement, whatever their motto's or origination don't tend to back those types of candidates. The Paul's are the only two I know of who come close to fitting that description.

ETA:

You know, I am quite convinced that the plan that the previous administration had was this:

"When the Democrats are in power, they will have to pay for the mess then. They'll have to either cut services or raise taxes, and when they do, we'll hammer them as hard as we can. If they do neither, we'll hammer them on the rising deficit"

That would also explain the tax cuts (set to expire after Bush left office) and Medicare Part D (not showing up as cost until Bush left office). They may not have planned it that way, but anybody who stepped into office in January 2009 was fiscally screwed from the get go.

[villa]

I consider any birther stuff or Obama is a Muslim stuff to be race based.How convenient for you. To most of us, though, "Muslim" isn't a race but a religion, and the question of birth relates to his qualification to hold office as set forth in the Constitution.

So if you want to consider those to be "race based", you are obviously doing so only in a dishonest attempt to paint as racist a group you simply disagree with politically.

And that's really not very sporting of you, if I do say so myself.

I'm going to type slowly to give you a chance to understand.

Calling someone a Muslim doesn't make someone racist. What makes those who call Obama Muslim racist is that they would never in a million years make such allegations towards a white President.

The main reason Obama's faith is challenged is because of the color of his skin.

[BrainGlutton]

I consider any birther stuff or Obama is a Muslim stuff to be race based.How convenient for you. To most of us, though, "Muslim" isn't a race but a religion . . .

Tell that to the Arab Christian (there are some in America -- they're 10% of the Arab world's population) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Christians#Diaspora) who has been getting funny looks ever since 9/11.

[Euphonious Polemic]

They may not have planned it that way, but anybody who stepped into office in January 2009 was fiscally screwed from the get go.

Oh they planned it that way, you can be assured. It is not just a series of coincidences.

[BrainGlutton]

They may not have planned it that way, but anybody who stepped into office in January 2009 was fiscally screwed from the get go.

Oh they planned it that way, you can be assured. It is not just a series of coincidences.

Who's "they"?

[Starving Artist]

What makes those who call Obama Muslim racist is that they would never in a million years make such allegations towards a white President. Sure they would. Here's an example (http://www.indymedia.ie/attachments/dec2004/george_bush_muslim.jpg). :p
The main reason Obama's faith is challenged is because of the color of his skin.No it isn't. A white man with the same name and the same childhood backgound would fall under the same type of suspicion. And most of the Muslims that Americans hate, resent and fear are white.

[emacknight]

So, if we've established that the Tea Party is just as (if not more) socially conservative than the Republican Party. And their fiscal stance is nothing more than to oppose what Obama does.

What's their point? How are they different/distinct from the Republican Party?

I think one of the most telling features of the Tea Party is that their queen made no mention of any of this when running for VP.

[elucidator]

....And most of the Muslims that Americans hate, resent and fear are white.

Remember, you heard it here first!

[RickJay]

Bullshit. If you hire new employees just because you get a tax cut, you are a very poor businessman. Most businesses have plenty of capital to hire employees, but they lack demand for their products. What is the point of hiring employees if you don't have enough work for the ones you have now? Tax cuts do not spur hiring, consumer demand does. We have had tax cuts for the wealthy for almost ten years now; where are all the jobs you say should have been created? Why didn't the Bush tax cuts work the first time around? Why should we increase the deficit to line the pockets of corporations that aren't going to hire anybody anyway? Tax cuts are just a give away to the wealthy.
It's not exactly that simple, thoguh you're mostly right, but it's irrelevant; were it not for the taxes that business pays, how in the hell could business function? It'd be pretty hard to run a business with no government. No rule of law, no public infrastructure, no civil justice, no common currency...

[John Mace]

Tea Partiers not only want to reduce the deficit, but they also want to reduce the size of the federal government. You're not going to get many (any?) Democrats signing up for that.
While that's true enough, it doesn't mean that the Tea Partiers are Libertarians or even traditional fiscal conservatives. Where were they when the previous administration decided to start two wars and cut taxes? I didn't hear much of, "We're fighting two wars, we have to pay for them somehow."

The much-maligned and woefully too small stimulus is a drop in the bucket compared to the two wars that we have run off the theory of . . . well, shit, y'know John, I can't even imagine what theory the previous administration had in mind to pay for the wars. Where were the deficit hawks then?

I didn't mean to imply that they were libertarian. Like I said much earlier in this thread, I would be surprised if more than 10% of TPs would fall in that category. Most seem to be run-of-the-mill social conservatives who are "Mad as hell, and aren't going to take it anymore".

As for the wars, the original estimate for Iraq was $50B. Oops. Afghanistan was always pretty much open ended. Good luck Obama trying to end that without Afghanistan turning into another Taliban run disaster.

[Euphonious Polemic]

Oh they planned it that way, you can be assured. It is not just a series of coincidences.

Who's "they"?

Those concerned with long-term strategery for the Republican Party. Not Bush, nor Mcain, and CERTAINLY not Palin. Maybe Rove,Cheney, and others.

[user_hostile]

You think your grandparents would be honored that you said this? (snip)

I would think that the "what the hell, they're dead" comment would explain this. It doesn't matter whether they would be honored or not. They are dead.

I just don't get the coolness factor of dissing your blood relatives. How cool would be if your grand-kids called you "sand-nigger?"

I would tell them, that's "dune coon" to you. Silly person, I am far above being offended by name-calling.

:(:(:(. I think a better way to describe it is autistic.

[enipla]

When things are going to hell in a hand basket, it is often a good idea to stop and perhaps take a turn off the road. President Obama is a good thing.

I will support pretty much anything that is not what Bush was or the folks that are nothing but the same under a different name. It stuns me. The Tea Party is actually worse than Bush. This new ‘Party’ wants to distance themselves from the last Republican fiasco. The Tea Party wants to burn the constitution and what made America what it is (or was) by putting religion back in government.

Have they forgotten 4th grade history class?

From where I sit and what I see, the Tea Party can’t see beyond next Tuesday.

For instance, the ‘Tea Party’ in Colorado is for a 50% reduction for school spending. I don’t have children and never will, but understand that education is important for everyone’s future. Colorado is #34th in $ per student in the nation. It’s embarrassing.

I really don’t know how to respond to these folks, but I have tried.

I emailed the woman that runs the site that sponsors this amendment, and she actually responded. She said “thank you for your polite email, most people just curse at me”. She stated that the shortfall for education would be picked up by the State.

I asked “if the state general budget is effectively gone to support schools, and state funds are also reduced by other amendments, where is the money going to come from to maintain roads and infrastructure?” (just the tip of the iceberg really)

She has not responded.

People that can’t see further ahead than the next TV they can buy on so called ‘tax savings’ should not be making budget amendments to the Colorado constitution.

[elucidator]

....And most of the Muslims that Americans hate, resent and fear are white.

I know better, but just can't help it, I gotta ask: What in the hell are you talking about?

[John Mace]

....And most of the Muslims that Americans hate, resent and fear are white.

I know better, but just can't help it, I gotta ask: What in the hell are you talking about?

They're religious bigots, not racial bigots. Nothing to worry about!

[Fear Itself]

....And most of the Muslims that Americans hate, resent and fear are white.

I know better, but just can't help it, I gotta ask: What in the hell are you talking about?I am sure it has something to do with brown paper bags. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_paper_bag_test)

[Morella]

Bullshit. If you hire new employees just because you get a tax cut, you are a very poor businessman. Most businesses have plenty of capital to hire employees, but they lack demand for their products. What is the point of hiring employees if you don't have enough work for the ones you have now?

Dumbass...I have enough work. I need equipment, and employees, and that costs money. I can either pay it in taxes, where it will be spent on Chinese windmills and otherwise flushed down the toilet, or I can buy more equipment and hire people to operate it. Because I have to pay it in taxes, jobs will not be created. That's how it works. Why is that so difficult to understand?

We have had tax cuts for the wealthy for almost ten years now; where are all the jobs you say should have been created?

Fox News just posted a link to a tax cut rate calculator, and you might be surprised at just where the line for "the rich" is drawn. I only allow myself and my husband a small salary, because we put all of our money into the business, and we're always working, so we don't have time to spend it anyway, yet, the taxes on my lower-middle class salary will be increased, dramatically. The $250,000 figure that Obama talked about is just outright horse shit. The tax cuts are "across the board".

Is the economy fucked up, despite the tax cuts? Yes, just as sometimes a wound festers despite the best medical treatment. Does that mean that medical treatment is a failure, and we should try shaking maracas instead? No. We know that shaking maracas will not cure a wound, just as we know that we can't tax our way out of a recession. Leeching money from the economy can only make things worse...history has shown us that. So why do you want your taxes increased?

[Fear Itself]

Fox News just posted a link to a tax cut rate calculator, and you might be surprised at just where the line for "the rich" is drawn.

...

So why do you want your taxes increased?I don't believe a word Fox News publishes. Period.

The $250,000 figure that Obama talked about is just outright horse shit. The tax cuts are "across the board".Yes, everyone keeps the tax cut on the first $250k. Anything over that goes back up to 39%. What is your point?

My taxes aren't going up, and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.

[Morella]

Exactly. If tax cuts are what will cause more people to get hired by more businesses, why didn't we have a net job gain during the Bush administrations, when the tax cuts were in effect? It's all a lie, is why.

Go further back in time to Reagan and his Reaganomics trickle down theory - that the benefits of "corporate hand outs" would trickle down to everyone. It was a spectacular failure. Nothing trickled down.

Corporations won't save the American economy. Small business will. The snowjob is that this is about government vs. big business. It isn't. I'm not happy with the things that big business and government have done to this country, and you're a fool if you believe that one or the other will be your salvation. What we need to do is put a muzzle on government, cut it back, start scrapping it, so that small business can survive and prosper.

I can't speak for corporations, only for my business, and for other business owners I know, and I can tell you that we are able, willing, and ready to hire people, if the government will leave us alone and let us do it. Unfortunately, the situation just got a whole lot worse with Barrycare.

[Morella]

This indicates that you are very, very wrong about the racial makeup of this group. Your agenda is that you want to convince us that the Tea Party are just a regular sample of the population whose only concern is the economy.

No, what I was saying was that the groups are probably not predominately racist, because there are plenty of black people involved with them, plenty of blacks involved, no fistfights or murders. I don't see anyone actually counting the numbers.

[George Kaplin]

Dumbass...I have enough work. I need equipment, and employees, and that costs money. I can either pay it in taxes, where it will be spent on Chinese windmills and otherwise flushed down the toilet, or I can buy more equipment and hire people to operate it. Because I have to pay it in taxes, jobs will not be created. That's how it works. Why is that so difficult to understand?


May I ask, what does your business produce?

[Morella]

Cut my taxes in half right now and I will give you a job. This would only be true if you are an employer who hires people simply out of a desire to see them have a job.

Must I digress to the GED level? I want to hire people because those people can make money for me, and expand my business. I am willing to pay them whatever they are worth to me as assets. That's the way it works in the real world.

Without the government leeches attached, both to me, and to the employee, the business could expand faster, and more people would have jobs.

If, on the other hand, you're like most employers, and you hire the number of people you need to maximize your profit, then you're spouting complete bullshit. If another employee would increase your company's profitability, you would hire that person right now.

IF and ONLY IF I had the venture capital to pay for the equipment and the employee's training. I do expect to see a return on that money when the employee becomes productive. That's how it works. Unfortunately, I have to spend my capital on taxes, which will go to Chinese windmills, and to support people who don't work for a living, and that is what will fuck up the economy. The economy is what we make of it...if we don't work, we aren't making anything.

I wouldn't blame you for this. If i were a small business owner, and i got a tax cut, there's no way i'd use it to hire someone just for the hell of it. I'd pocket the money.

If you were to start your own business, it would be a major reality check for you. Money in your pocket is worthless. "Money" does nothing but go down in value. It has to be invested, in people and in equipment.

And if my business profitability would be improved by hiring a new employee, i'd do that whether or not there was a tax cut because more profit is good for the business and for me, even if it's being taxed.

If you had the money to do it, yes. If you had to spend the money on taxes, it would go to waste, and someone would be unemployed. That is exactly what is going on.

[Fear Itself]

Morella:

What would you consider a fair top marginal tax rate, with which conservatives would be satisfied, and no longer campaign for tax cuts?

[Morella]

Can you read for comprehension? I am asking, if its only focus is getting rid of government waste, why are all the candidates it endorses socially conservative? Is everyone who is fiscally conservative also socially conservative? Is gay marriage government waste? Since when did abortion laws have an effect on the deficit? DADT seems to cost the government money, shouldn't they support repealing it? Or has this purportedly fiscal movement been taken over by social conservatives? If this movement is based solely on fiscal issues, where are the socially tolerant candidates?

Ever watch Battlestar Galactica? "You have to pick your side". I would be in complete agreement with a political party, that supported these ideas :

Religion is total bullshit, and should be abolished.
The EPA and most other regulatory agencies should be abolished.
All prescription drugs should be freely available to adults. No drugs should be illegal.
Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS.
Antitrust regulations should be toughened.
No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor.
Any person living in this country illegally should be shot.
Welfare, public education, and social security should be abolished.
No free health care, for anyone.

Does any party align with all of these ideas? No. I will vote conservative, despite the fact that I obviously disagree with much of the conservative agenda, because it is the lesser of all of the evils. I won't hate black people, and I won't praise Jesus, whether the party that I have chosen to vote for does or not. That's what we all have to do...pick our side. It's not a perfect world.

[Morella]

My contention is the whole point of the current tea party movement, on a large scale is to get Republicans in office without having to address what happened the last time they were in Congress.To say nothing of dodging responsibility for that near trillion dollar debacle they fomented in in Iraq, and SHOVED DOWN OUR THROATS!
They wouldn't want to have to take responsibility for that, now would they?

That debacle in Iraq goes all of the way back to post-WWI and the Treaty of Versailles.

[Morella]

Dumbass...I have enough work. I need equipment, and employees, and that costs money. I can either pay it in taxes, where it will be spent on Chinese windmills and otherwise flushed down the toilet, or I can buy more equipment and hire people to operate it. Because I have to pay it in taxes, jobs will not be created. That's how it works. Why is that so difficult to understand?


May I ask, what does your business produce?

Properly located freight.

[Morella]

So why do you want your taxes increased?[/quote]I don't believe a word Fox News publishes. Period.

I don't either, but I'll listen to anything, and if it sounds like horse shit, I'll research it. That's all a link is, just a place to look. You have to make your own decisions, and I hope that you wouldn't believe, or disbelieve, anything just because it comes from a particular source. That would be ignorant.

My taxes aren't going up, and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.[/QUOTE]

Anyone who thinks that taxes are not going up is a dreamer, or just hasn't looked into the historical data.

[Morella]

Morella:

What would you consider a fair top marginal tax rate, with which conservatives would be satisfied, and no longer campaign for tax cuts?

I'm more into the "flat tax" idea. Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?

[emacknight]

Morella:

What would you consider a fair top marginal tax rate, with which conservatives would be satisfied, and no longer campaign for tax cuts?

I'm more into the "flat tax" idea. Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?

What makes you think you work harder?

[emacknight]

Can you read for comprehension? I am asking, if its only focus is getting rid of government waste, why are all the candidates it endorses socially conservative? Is everyone who is fiscally conservative also socially conservative? Is gay marriage government waste? Since when did abortion laws have an effect on the deficit? DADT seems to cost the government money, shouldn't they support repealing it? Or has this purportedly fiscal movement been taken over by social conservatives? If this movement is based solely on fiscal issues, where are the socially tolerant candidates?

Ever watch Battlestar Galactica? "You have to pick your side". I would be in complete agreement with a political party, that supported these ideas :

Religion is total bullshit, and should be abolished.
The EPA and most other regulatory agencies should be abolished.
All prescription drugs should be freely available to adults. No drugs should be illegal.
Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS.
Antitrust regulations should be toughened.
No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor.
Any person living in this country illegally should be shot.
Welfare, public education, and social security should be abolished.
No free health care, for anyone.

Does any party align with all of these ideas? No. I will vote conservative, despite the fact that I obviously disagree with much of the conservative agenda, because it is the lesser of all of the evils. I won't hate black people, and I won't praise Jesus, whether the party that I have chosen to vote for does or not. That's what we all have to do...pick our side. It's not a perfect world.

God damn that is some scary shit right there. Let's all take a moment to be thankful the two party system hasn't resulted in one that includes the list above.

[Lobohan]

Can you read for comprehension? I am asking, if its only focus is getting rid of government waste, why are all the candidates it endorses socially conservative? Is everyone who is fiscally conservative also socially conservative? Is gay marriage government waste? Since when did abortion laws have an effect on the deficit? DADT seems to cost the government money, shouldn't they support repealing it? Or has this purportedly fiscal movement been taken over by social conservatives? If this movement is based solely on fiscal issues, where are the socially tolerant candidates?

Ever watch Battlestar Galactica? "You have to pick your side". I would be in complete agreement with a political party, that supported these ideas :

Religion is total bullshit, and should be abolished.
The EPA and most other regulatory agencies should be abolished.
All prescription drugs should be freely available to adults. No drugs should be illegal.
Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS.
Antitrust regulations should be toughened.
No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor.
Any person living in this country illegally should be shot.
Welfare, public education, and social security should be abolished.
No free health care, for anyone.

Does any party align with all of these ideas? No. I will vote conservative, despite the fact that I obviously disagree with much of the conservative agenda, because it is the lesser of all of the evils. I won't hate black people, and I won't praise Jesus, whether the party that I have chosen to vote for does or not. That's what we all have to do...pick our side. It's not a perfect world.It sure wouldn't be a perfect world if you were in charge. Your ideas betray a broad spectrum of reality you simply don't understand and probably are too stupid to learn.

Typical 21st century American conservative, ignorance and anger are the only ingredients.

[gonzomax]

You increase your staff when the present one can not keep up with demand. Cutting company taxes will just make the owners richer if they are keeping up with the customers. They will not add staff because they have lots of money.
The owners have had tax cuts for a decade and employment has not dropped., it has gone way up. The wealthy are accumulating unprecedented piles of money. They are not hiring. Tax cuts to the top, our old trickle down theory, has been destroyed as a workable economic model.

[Fear Itself]

Morella:

What would you consider a fair top marginal tax rate, with which conservatives would be satisfied, and no longer campaign for tax cuts?

I'm more into the "flat tax" idea. Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?For sake of argument, your wish is granted. You may have a flat tax. What rate is it?

[elucidator]

Some minor points of clarification.

You are aware, I trust, that some of the persons currently living illegally in the US are children? Would you recommend smaller caliber weapons? Perhaps some clemency may be offered if they are willing to pull the trigger on the scoundrels responsible for their condition, that is, their parents?

[gonzomax]

Morella:

What would you consider a fair top marginal tax rate, with which conservatives would be satisfied, and no longer campaign for tax cuts?

I'm more into the "flat tax" idea. Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?

Because you do not. There is a TV program that the CEOs go and do the work of the people at the bottom of the corporation ladder. They are always stunned to see how hard they work , and how much they care about doing a good job. The bosses had the feeling that people who make poor money don't work hard or care. They are as wrong as you.
But it is allowed to blame the poor for their lot in life and to look down on them. Do their jobs and live their lives and you would see how far off that attitude is.

[Bryan Ekers]

Religion is total bullshit, and should be abolished.
The EPA and most other regulatory agencies should be abolished.
All prescription drugs should be freely available to adults. No drugs should be illegal.
Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS.
Antitrust regulations should be toughened.
No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor.
Any person living in this country illegally should be shot.
Welfare, public education, and social security should be abolished.
No free health care, for anyone.

Does any party align with all of these ideas? No.

Well, the Somali New Democratic Party comes close... Their list of who should be shot is a bit longer, though.

[Morella]

I'm more into the "flat tax" idea. Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?For sake of argument, your wish is granted. You may have a flat tax. What rate is it?

For sake of argument, I would have to see some data on what it would cost to run the government, after the cuts that I suggested were implemented. It wouldn't be much.

[Fear Itself]

For sake of argument, your wish is granted. You may have a flat tax. What rate is it?

For sake of argument, I would have to see some data on what it would cost to run the government, after the cuts that I suggested were implemented. I'll wait.

[Morella]

Some minor points of clarification.

You are aware, I trust, that some of the persons currently living illegally in the US are children? Would you recommend smaller caliber weapons? Perhaps some clemency may be offered if they are willing to pull the trigger on the scoundrels responsible for their condition, that is, their parents?

What is the point in discussing the details of a plan that does not exist, and will probably never exist, in the United States? I feel that all illegal immigrants should be shot. I do not believe that it will ever happen, in the United States. We always have to be higher and mightier than everyone else, whatever the cost to our own lives. That's just one of the reasons why we're going down in flames.

[Bryan Ekers]

For sake of argument, your wish is granted. You may have a flat tax. What rate is it?

For sake of argument, I would have to see some data on what it would cost to run the government, after the cuts that I suggested were implemented. It wouldn't be much.

Let's say defense and entitlements are decimated, leaving a Federal government that costs as much to run as, say, the 1950 equivalent (~$44.8 billion), adjusted for inflation (to ~$395 billion). The actual 2010 total is about $3,720 billion, or 9.5 times the 1950 amount.

Of course, you'll have to give back all those highways....

[Lobohan]

For sake of argument, your wish is granted. You may have a flat tax. What rate is it?

For sake of argument, I would have to see some data on what it would cost to run the government, after the cuts that I suggested were implemented. It wouldn't be much.Have you stopped to consider that the cuts you want to implement are stupid? And that with those cuts the GDP would crash because of social disorder? And that thick-headed lazy morons like you aren't exactly gonna excel when reduced to the social-darwinism you crave?

I'm more sure that you'll stay wrapped up in your ignorance and whine while the prosperity engendered by more intelligent people makes your life better.

[Fear Itself]

We always have to be higher and mightier than everyone else, whatever the cost to our own lives. That's just one of the reasons why we're going down in flames.As the Tea Party is fond of saying, "Freedom Isn't Free!"

[Morella]

I'm more into the "flat tax" idea. Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?

Because you do not. There is a TV program that the CEOs go and do the work of the people at the bottom of the corporation ladder. They are always stunned to see how hard they work , and how much they care about doing a good job. The bosses had the feeling that people who make poor money don't work hard or care. They are as wrong as you.
But it is allowed to blame the poor for their lot in life and to look down on them. Do their jobs and live their lives and you would see how far off that attitude is.

Did I mention that I own a SMALL business? As well as being a CEO, I am a pilot, aviation mechanic, truck driver, network administrator, and everything else that my business needs, whenever it needs me, which is most of the time.

And, for the smartass who is bound to ask, yes, I do have ATP, A&P, CDL, and Comptia Network+.

Now, for those of you who think that you work harder than I do, I have to ask:

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)
How many hours a day do you spend at home?
(I am only home once a month, at best, for a couple of days)
How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)
When your phone goes off with a problem at work, do you drop everything, any time of the day or night, and go off to fix it, even if it means travelling thousands of miles, going days without sleep, or risking your life?
(That's in my job description)
Do you work in any kind of weather, even if it is dangerous?
(Yup)
If you need new job skills, such as an industrial rating or a foreign language, are you willing to spend every minute of your free time learning it?

IF you work as hard as I do, and you're willing to do it for me, please, let me know, because I can probably find a way to hire you, with or without a tax cut.

[Morella]

For sake of argument, I would have to see some data on what it would cost to run the government, after the cuts that I suggested were implemented. It wouldn't be much.

Let's say defense and entitlements are decimated, leaving a Federal government that costs as much to run as, say, the 1950 equivalent (~$44.8 billion), adjusted for inflation (to ~$395 billion). The actual 2010 total is about $3,720 billion, or 9.5 times the 1950 amount.

Of course, you'll have to give back all those highways....

Oh, god dammit, that's funny! I almost choked on the cheesburger than I'm shoveling down. Have you ever heard of IFTA? Look it up, and then you'll understand what I mean when I say...

If the government wants to give me a break on my IFTA tax, I'll pay the goddam 39% income tax and smile about it! I could use a few million bucks!

[Morella]

Have you stopped to consider that the cuts you want to implement are stupid?

How have you managed that? I haven't even gotten around to listing them yet!

And that with those cuts the GDP would crash because of social disorder?

How is it doing now?

And that thick-headed lazy morons like you aren't exactly gonna excel when reduced to the social-darwinism you crave?

Thick-headed lazy people will always do poorly. I'm tired of paying the bill for it, that's all.

[emacknight]

I am a pilot, aviation mechanic, truck driver,

<snip>

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)

How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)


I can see now why you'd want to get rid of regulations.

[Lobohan]

Let's say defense and entitlements are decimated, leaving a Federal government that costs as much to run as, say, the 1950 equivalent (~$44.8 billion), adjusted for inflation (to ~$395 billion). The actual 2010 total is about $3,720 billion, or 9.5 times the 1950 amount.

Of course, you'll have to give back all those highways....

Oh, god dammit, that's funny! I almost choked on the cheesburger than I'm shoveling down. Have you ever heard of IFTA? Look it up, and then you'll understand what I mean when I say...

If the government wants to give me a break on my IFTA tax, I'll pay the goddam 39% income tax and smile about it! I could use a few million bucks!Doesn't that tax go to the states? Before the federal/Canadian agreement you'd have to fill out paperwork for each state you operated in, right? So you want to return to a time of more paperwork and more red tape, permits for and inspections at the entry to each state? Interesting. Do I have that mixed up? I'd honestly like to know if I do.

Also, and I'm letting you in on a secret here, if you aren't making enough because of a tax you need to charge more. That chunk of business advice was free, because I like helping idiots. :D

[Morella]

Doesn't that (IFTA) tax go to the states? Before the federal/Canadian agreement you'd have to fill out paperwork for each state you operated in, right? So you want to return to a time of more paperwork and more red tape, permits for and inspections at the entry to each state? Interesting. Do I have that mixed up? I'd honestly like to know if I do.

You have the details right, but you missed the forest for the trees. I was responding to the ridiculous idea that there would be no funds for the highways without a bloated income tax. Imagine 100,000 miles per year, $0.12 per mile, per truck, per year. That's $12,000 per year, per truck. There are an estimated $15.5 million trucks on the road. That's $186,000,000,000 per year in IFTA taxes alone, not to mention the tolls and non-commercial fuel taxes. If they can't fix the roads for what they're charging in taxes, maybe the money is being siphoned off somewhere else? More government definitely won't make that situation better!

Also, and I'm letting you in on a secret here, if you aren't making enough because of a tax you need to charge more. That chunk of business advice was free, because I like helping idiots. :D

Thank you kindly. When I pass your helpful information on to my customers, I'm sure that they will understand and agree with you, and be more than happy to fork over the money to pay the tax. Going with a different carrier will never cross their minds.

[Lobohan]

Doesn't that (IFTA) tax go to the states? Before the federal/Canadian agreement you'd have to fill out paperwork for each state you operated in, right? So you want to return to a time of more paperwork and more red tape, permits for and inspections at the entry to each state? Interesting. Do I have that mixed up? I'd honestly like to know if I do.

You have the details right, but you missed the forest for the trees. I was responding to the ridiculous idea that there would be no funds for the highways without a bloated income tax. Imagine 100,000 miles per year, $0.12 per mile, per truck, per year. That's $12,000 per year, per truck. There are an estimated $15.5 million trucks on the road. That's $186,000,000,000 per year in IFTA taxes alone, not to mention the tolls and non-commercial fuel taxes. If they can't fix the roads for what they're charging in taxes, maybe the money is being siphoned off somewhere else? More government definitely won't make that situation better!Ah, that makes sense. I appreciate the context. Although I would suppose that fixing the roads is pretty expensive. But I have no specific information about the amounts.

Thank you kindly. When I pass your helpful information on to my customers, I'm sure that they will understand and agree with you, and be more than happy to fork over the money to pay the tax. Going with a different carrier will never cross their minds.If your competitors can afford to do it don't they deserve to run you out of business? Rarw! Survival of the fittest y'all!

[Morella]

I am a pilot, aviation mechanic, truck driver,

<snip>

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)

How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)


I can see now why you'd want to get rid of regulations.

You think you do, but you don't really. The regulations have done nothing to keep pilots and drivers from falling asleep, and they may have actually made the situation worse.

[Morella]

Thank you kindly. When I pass your helpful information on to my customers, I'm sure that they will understand and agree with you, and be more than happy to fork over the money to pay the tax. Going with a different carrier will never cross their minds.

If your competitors can afford to do it don't they deserve to run you out of business? Rarw! Survival of the fittest y'all!

Absolutely, although I fail to see how that has nothing to do with taxes.

[Bryan Ekers]

I was responding to the ridiculous idea that there would be no funds for the highways without a bloated income tax.

Well, that wasn't the point I was trying to make, but I'm glad you got a chuckle out of it.

[emacknight]

I can see now why you'd want to get rid of regulations.

You think you do, but you don't really. The regulations have done nothing to keep pilots and drivers from falling asleep, and they may have actually made the situation worse.

No, I really do. I was just saying the other day that what we need are more pilots not sleeping or eating, that have unfettered access to unregulated narcotics, and nothing to discourage their use. I can't imagine anything going wrong.

[Morella]

You think you do, but you don't really. The regulations have done nothing to keep pilots and drivers from falling asleep, and they may have actually made the situation worse.

No, I really do. I was just saying the other day that what we need are more pilots not sleeping or eating, that have unfettered access to unregulated narcotics, and nothing to discourage their use. I can't imagine anything going wrong.

I don't have to imagine. Whereas you are just parroting back the same bullshit that the media has fed you, I've been there. This carrier, for instance

http://www.baaa-acro.com/Compagnies%20S/SMB%20Stage%20Line.htm

had one of the worst collections of alcohols and druggies to terrorize the skies, yet their safety record was outstanding. Out of the five incidents mentioned (I am familiar with the details of all five), not one had anything to do with alcohol or drugs. In fact...

Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use.

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?

Hey, you brought it up, man...

[Lobohan]

Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use.

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?

Hey, you brought it up, man...Not one person has escaped from Pelican Bay. So why spend millions on guards? :rolleyes:

Jesus fuck, is every single libertarian a fucking idiot?

[Squink]

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?Well, it's a damned sight less than the hundreds of billions future tea partiers insisted we spend on protecting Americans from Saddam's nonexistant WMD's. It's still peanuts compared to the bloated defense budget. If tea partiers want to be taken seriously on their 'fiscal conservatism" they need to point at something more substantial than pilot drug testing and "torte* reform."
Braying about picayune shit just feeds ignorance by cluttering up the national dialog. Is that a tea party value?
At this point, it seems likely that it is.

-----
* Linzer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linzer_torte) or Sachertorte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacher_torte)?

[emacknight]

No, I really do. I was just saying the other day that what we need are more pilots not sleeping or eating, that have unfettered access to unregulated narcotics, and nothing to discourage their use. I can't imagine anything going wrong.

I don't have to imagine. Whereas you are just parroting back the same bullshit that the media has fed you, I've been there. This carrier, for instance

http://www.baaa-acro.com/Compagnies%20S/SMB%20Stage%20Line.htm

had one of the worst collections of alcohols and druggies to terrorize the skies, yet their safety record was outstanding. Out of the five incidents mentioned (I am familiar with the details of all five), not one had anything to do with alcohol or drugs. In fact...

Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use.

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?

Hey, you brought it up, man...

Hey, I'm right there with you. I know personally I'd perform surgery considerably better high as a kite, but the fucking government won't let me. Meanwhile, not one patient has died because their doctor was coked out of his mind, not one! But the big threat they have against me is that they'll pull my license. Why the fuck do I need a license to practice medicine. If I'm good at it, patients will pay me, if I kill people, they won't.

And these fucking DUI laws are the biggest pain in the ass. Do I really need to wait an hour to sober up before I drive to work? It's stop and go traffic anyways, are you seriously telling me I can't do that drunk?

[Morella]

Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use.

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?

Hey, you brought it up, man...Not one person has escaped from Pelican Bay. So why spend millions on guards? :rolleyes:

Your logic is flawed. We never had a Pelican Bay without guards. We had a very nice transportation system without drug testing...

...until Robert DuPont invented the first urine test, and the Reagans owned Dupont stock, and then guess what...

Suddenly, the nation has a drug problem, and it's more important than any other issue! Drug test everyone, even the janitors, before something happens and your children are killed! Oh, my God! Up springs a multibillion dollar urine testing business, which, like taxes, leeches from the economy and produces nothing.

This is what I'm talking about when I say that to put your faith neither in government nor in big business. They are in cahoots with each other, trying to get you to take "sides" instead of thinking about what is actually going on.

[Morella]

Hey, I'm right there with you. I know personally I'd perform surgery considerably better high as a kite, but the fucking government won't let me. Meanwhile, not one patient has died because their doctor was coked out of his mind, not one! But the big threat they have against me is that they'll pull my license. Why the fuck do I need a license to practice medicine. If I'm good at it, patients will pay me, if I kill people, they won't.


Putting down the crack pipe might be a good idea. I am talking about drug testing, which has nothing to do with what condition a person is in while working.

And these fucking DUI laws are the biggest pain in the ass. Do I really need to wait an hour to sober up before I drive to work? It's stop and go traffic anyways, are you seriously telling me I can't do that drunk?

What does drug testing in the airline industry have to do with driving your car to work? Or are we doing another strawman argument?

[Morella]

Well, it's a damned sight less than the hundreds of billions future tea partiers insisted we spend on protecting Americans from Saddam's nonexistant WMD's.

Oh, really?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
http://www.internet-grocer.net/weapons.htm

It's still peanuts compared to the bloated defense budget. If tea partiers want to be taken seriously on their 'fiscal conservatism" they need to point at something more substantial than pilot drug testing and "torte* reform."

There is a whole bunch of stuff that needs to be cut. My guess is that the Tea Party's list is short, compared to mine.

Braying about picayune shit just feeds ignorance by cluttering up the national dialog. Is that a tea party value?

Acune idée. I don't think they have agreed on a list of values.

[emacknight]

Hey, I'm right there with you. I know personally I'd perform surgery considerably better high as a kite, but the fucking government won't let me. Meanwhile, not one patient has died because their doctor was coked out of his mind, not one! But the big threat they have against me is that they'll pull my license. Why the fuck do I need a license to practice medicine. If I'm good at it, patients will pay me, if I kill people, they won't.


Putting down the crack pipe might be a good idea. I am talking about drug testing, which has nothing to do with what condition a person is in while working.

And these fucking DUI laws are the biggest pain in the ass. Do I really need to wait an hour to sober up before I drive to work? It's stop and go traffic anyways, are you seriously telling me I can't do that drunk?

What does drug testing in the airline industry have to do with driving your car to work? Or are we doing another strawman argument?

Now I'm confused. Are you saying I shouldn't operate stoned out of my mind?

If pilots can do their job all hopped up on goof balls, why can't I?

[Lobohan]

Well, it's a damned sight less than the hundreds of billions future tea partiers insisted we spend on protecting Americans from Saddam's nonexistant WMD's.

Oh, really?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
http://www.internet-grocer.net/weapons.htm



There is a whole bunch of stuff that needs to be cut. My guess is that the Tea Party's list is short, compared to mine.

Braying about picayune shit just feeds ignorance by cluttering up the national dialog. Is that a tea party value?

Acune idée. I don't think they have agreed on a list of values.Wow. You're more of an idiot than I thought. You actually believe that Saddam had WMD? Okay then. I guess there's not point talking to you. I'm sorry to bring facts to your ignorance jamboree.

Tell me about Obama's birth certificate, why don't you?

[Morella]

Now I'm confused. Are you saying I shouldn't operate stoned out of my mind?


Nope. I don't know much about the practical end of the medical business, and you're comparing apples to oranges anyway, so I'm not going to respond to that stupid comment.

If pilots can do their job all hopped up on goof balls, why can't I?

Geez, and to think, someone accused ME of making strawman arguments? I didn't say that anyone should do their job while under the influence.

[Morella]

Oh, really?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
http://www.internet-grocer.net/weapons.htm

There is a whole bunch of stuff that needs to be cut. My guess is that the Tea Party's list is short, compared to mine.

Acune idée. I don't think they have agreed on a list of values.Wow. You're more of an idiot than I thought. You actually believe that Saddam had WMD? Okay then. I guess there's not point talking to you. I'm sorry to bring facts to your ignorance jamboree.

Tell me about Obama's birth certificate, why don't you?

Does this mean that you have a comment about the two links that I posted, or that you have other information to share? Or do you just feel better for having called me an idiot?

What would you like to know about Obama's birth certificate?

[miss elizabeth]

Did I mention that I own a SMALL business? As well as being a CEO, I am a pilot, aviation mechanic, truck driver, network administrator, and everything else that my business needs, whenever it needs me, which is most of the time.
...
Now, for those of you who think that you work harder than I do, I have to ask:

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)
How many hours a day do you spend at home?
(I am only home once a month, at best, for a couple of days)
How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)
When your phone goes off with a problem at work, do you drop everything, any time of the day or night, and go off to fix it, even if it means travelling thousands of miles, going days without sleep, or risking your life?
(That's in my job description)
Do you work in any kind of weather, even if it is dangerous?
(Yup)
If you need new job skills, such as an industrial rating or a foreign language, are you willing to spend every minute of your free time learning it?

IF you work as hard as I do, and you're willing to do it for me, please, let me know, because I can probably find a way to hire you, with or without a tax cut.

How the FUCK do find time to post on here so much then?

Sniff, sniff.... I smell bullshit!

[Morella]

How the FUCK do find time to post on here so much then?

Sniff, sniff.... I smell bullshit!

I knew someone was going to ask me that.

Right now, I am waiting for a call. There is a lapse in business, which is ANNOYING THE PISS OUT OF ME!

Normally, I find time, every couple of days or so, or whenever I'm at a hotel or terminal with Internet access. That's why I have a different IP address every time. I flip around the message boards while paying bills, reading email, and all of that crap. Multitasking, as we used to call it...it must be the lesbian in me!

And if you don't get that joke, you're probably not a lesbian...

[emacknight]

Now I'm confused. Are you saying I shouldn't operate stoned out of my mind?


Nope. I don't know much about the practical end of the medical business, and you're comparing apples to oranges anyway, so I'm not going to respond to that stupid comment.

If pilots can do their job all hopped up on goof balls, why can't I?

Geez, and to think, someone accused ME of making strawman arguments? I didn't say that anyone should do their job while under the influence.

So are you saying that pilots shouldn't fly while drunk or stoned? You lost me.

You very clearly pointed out that, "Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use."

But then you don't think there should be drug testing.

I have to be to the hospital in two hours, do I need to sober up or not?

[Morella]

So are you saying that pilots shouldn't fly while drunk or stoned? You lost me.


Of course they shouldn't, and most of them don't. What I'm saying is that the government shouldn't be forcing us to spend billions of dollars to test their urine to see what they're doing on their days off, because that doesn't affect air safety.

You very clearly pointed out that, "Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use."

Yes.

But then you don't think there should be drug testing.

Exactly, just as we should not spend money testing to see whether or not they have consumed escargots, or lasagna. What is your point?

[kaylasdad99]

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?For curiosity's sake, where would one go to learn exactly how much money has actually been spent on drug testing?

[emacknight]

What is your point?

I was hoping to go to work drunk and/or stoned. And my plan was to use your "Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use" as my justification.

[Cisco]

Did I mention that I own a SMALL business? As well as being a CEO, I am a pilot, aviation mechanic, truck driver, network administrator, and everything else that my business needs, whenever it needs me, which is most of the time.

And, for the smartass who is bound to ask, yes, I do have ATP, A&P, CDL, and Comptia Network+.

Now, for those of you who think that you work harder than I do, I have to ask:

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)
How many hours a day do you spend at home?
(I am only home once a month, at best, for a couple of days)
How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)
When your phone goes off with a problem at work, do you drop everything, any time of the day or night, and go off to fix it, even if it means travelling thousands of miles, going days without sleep, or risking your life?
(That's in my job description)
Do you work in any kind of weather, even if it is dangerous?
(Yup)
If you need new job skills, such as an industrial rating or a foreign language, are you willing to spend every minute of your free time learning it?

IF you work as hard as I do, and you're willing to do it for me, please, let me know, because I can probably find a way to hire you, with or without a tax cut.
WTF is the point of living your life like that? I hope you don't have kids.

[Fear Itself]

Right now, I am waiting for a call. There is a lapse in business, which is ANNOYING THE PISS OUT OF ME!But you would still hire new employees, if only you got a tax cut!

[ElvisL1ves]

Specifically, a continuation of the current marginal rate above $250K, that is. IOW, in his dreams.

Morella, the corporate types running your party behind the scenes are misleading and using you. Too bad you're too dense to get it.

[Jack Batty]

Now, for those of you who think that you work harder than I do, I have to ask:

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)
How many hours a day do you spend at home?
(I am only home once a month, at best, for a couple of days)
How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)
When your phone goes off with a problem at work, do you drop everything, any time of the day or night, and go off to fix it, even if it means travelling thousands of miles, going days without sleep, or risking your life?
(That's in my job description)
Do you work in any kind of weather, even if it is dangerous?
(Yup)
If you need new job skills, such as an industrial rating or a foreign language, are you willing to spend every minute of your free time learning it?

Luxury!

[Cisco]

Did I mention that I own a SMALL business? As well as being a CEO, I am a pilot, aviation mechanic, truck driver, network administrator, and everything else that my business needs, whenever it needs me, which is most of the time.

And, for the smartass who is bound to ask, yes, I do have ATP, A&P, CDL, and Comptia Network+.

Now, for those of you who think that you work harder than I do, I have to ask:

How many hours a day do you sleep?
(I don't sleep every day)
How many hours a day do you spend at home?
(I am only home once a month, at best, for a couple of days)
How many times a day do you get to eat, and how long do you take?
(I eat once a day, sometimes twice, and I cram it in while I'm doing other things)
When your phone goes off with a problem at work, do you drop everything, any time of the day or night, and go off to fix it, even if it means travelling thousands of miles, going days without sleep, or risking your life?
(That's in my job description)
Do you work in any kind of weather, even if it is dangerous?
(Yup)
If you need new job skills, such as an industrial rating or a foreign language, are you willing to spend every minute of your free time learning it?

IF you work as hard as I do, and you're willing to do it for me, please, let me know, because I can probably find a way to hire you, with or without a tax cut.
WTF is the point of living your life like that? I hope you don't have kids.

Also, I think this explains why Morella is so angry.










(Assuming half of it is true, which, uh, I'm kind of doubting.)

[Morella]

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?For curiosity's sake, where would one go to learn exactly how much money has actually been spent on drug testing?

Google search?

[Morella]

WTF is the point of living your life like that? I hope you don't have kids.

The point is to make money and be successful. Why is that a problem?

Kids are already grown and out of the house.

[Morella]

Morella, the corporate types running your party behind the scenes are misleading and using you. Too bad you're too dense to get it.

What is my party? I vote independent.

How is anyone using me?

Also, I think this explains why Morella is so angry.

That's funny. Working hard won't make you angry. It will make you happy! Try it sometime.

He who is discontented should demand more from himself -Lao Tzu

[Morella]

Right now, I am waiting for a call. There is a lapse in business, which is ANNOYING THE PISS OUT OF ME!But you would still hire new employees, if only you got a tax cut!

Fear not, Moperator. It's been a rather nasty day off, I've had to do things that I don't normally do, like sleep and eat, but it looks like I am going to have the pleasure of working all night, and so I can't complain.

And, yes, I would like to have more employees, and more equipment, spread out over the US and Canada...maybe the world, someday. My business depends on being in the right place at the right time to catch loads.

[elucidator]

Quoting Lao Tzu to support compulsive ambition as a virtue is like quotiing Ayn Rand on a Christmas card.

[Morella]

What is your point?

I was hoping to go to work drunk and/or stoned. And my plan was to use your "Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use" as my justification.

"Not one aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use" does not imply that "pilots use drugs", or that "pilots should use drugs". How are you getting to that conclusion?

[Plan B]

Not fitting the narrative (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/108087/)

Here's an interesting story about those socially conservative Tea Party lunatics

[Bryan Ekers]

Meh, teasing out what parts of Morella's posts are true and what parts are designed to get a rise out of people is a quest with no reward.

Though I am still waiting for Starving Artist to name a tea-partier he likes.

[Tom Scud]

Though I am still waiting for Starving Artist to name a tea-partier he likes.

He explained elsewhere that he doesn't like any of them.

[Snowboarder Bo]

There is no struggle, rift, fight between those who claim the banner of the tea party and those who are in the Republican Party. We work together. (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_PALIN_CALIFORNIA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2010-10-16-22-32-44)

Offered just in case there are still people trying to maintain the fiction that the "tea party" is anything other than a slick marketing move by the Republicans.

[elucidator]

Mr. Steele reminds me of a crew boss I had, he had a hat said "I am their Leader! Where are they?"

[emacknight]

I was hoping to go to work drunk and/or stoned. And my plan was to use your "Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use" as my justification.

"Not one aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use" does not imply that "pilots use drugs", or that "pilots should use drugs". How are you getting to that conclusion?

If you don't test me, you won't know.

And if you remove the regulatory agency with authority, no one will stop me.

[Robot Arm]

Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use.Last I checked, the people investigating the accidents were the FAA; a big government bureaucracy, and therefore incompetent. They must have been just frittering away money, padding their expense accounts with junkets to conferences and crash sites, stuff like that. Then, on the afternoon the report was due, they just flipped a coin and said "wind shear, everyone okay with that?" I don't see why you'd trust their conclusions about whether the pilots were high or not.

Just more government incompetence. We're better off without it.

[Merijeek]

Not ONE aviation accident, in any airline, has ever been proven to have been caused by illegal drug use.

So, I have to ask...what is the justification for spending billions of dollars on drug testing?

Hey, you brought it up, man...Not one person has escaped from Pelican Bay. So why spend millions on guards? :rolleyes:

Jesus fuck, is every single libertarian a fucking idiot?

No, just living in a world that makes Disney movies look realistic.

-Joe

[CannyDan]

Not fitting the narrative (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/108087/)

Here's an interesting story about those socially conservative Tea Party lunatics

What story? I see a paid advertising street sign from Texas, giving absolutely zero indication of the actual popularity of the sentiment it expresses. For all we know, it was commissioned by some white guy with an English - Spanish dictionary.

Similarly, the other photo depicts a woman of possibly Latino ancestry holding a sign. Look closely at the people in the background and show me a single other individual who looks at all "ethnic". As far as I can tell, they are all blindingly white.

This is your exhibition of the Tea Party's "diversity" or a demonstration that it has broken free of the shackles of social conservatism? Epic fail.

[DianaG]

Based on everything I know about them, with a special emphasis on their defenders here, I'm led to the conclusion that the Tea Party is above all else socially inept.

[42fish]

For curiosity's sake, where would one go to learn exactly how much money has actually been spent on drug testing?

Google search?

Which can also be used to check on Morella's claim about no fatral air crashes being caused by drugs:

"In 1988, a Trans-Colorado Airlines, Fairchild Metro III, operating as Continental Express, with two crew members and 15 passengers on board, crashed short of the runway at Durango, Colorado, killing the two crew members and seven passengers. The NTSB found that the captain's use of cocaine degraded his performance and contributed to the accident (NTSB, 1989)."

[From "Alcohol and Other Drug Use in Commercial Transportation" by James Hall, the then-chair of the NTSB; found at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/s1p1.htm]

[SteveG1]

Based on everything I know about them, with a special emphasis on their defenders here, I'm led to the conclusion that the Tea Party is above all else socially inept.

I think the phrase you want is "Chronically and Irrevocably Stupid".

[Snowboarder Bo]

Google search?

Which can also be used to check on Morella's claim about no fatral air crashes being caused by drugs:

"In 1988, a Trans-Colorado Airlines, Fairchild Metro III, operating as Continental Express, with two crew members and 15 passengers on board, crashed short of the runway at Durango, Colorado, killing the two crew members and seven passengers. The NTSB found that the captain's use of cocaine degraded his performance and contributed to the accident (NTSB, 1989)."

[From "Alcohol and Other Drug Use in Commercial Transportation" by James Hall, the then-chair of the NTSB; found at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/s1p1.htm]
<gasp!>

So, Morella... is it that you thought you could get away with a lie, or are you just so fucking stupid that you think whatever you think is a "fact"?

[Lobohan]

Wow. You're more of an idiot than I thought. You actually believe that Saddam had WMD? Okay then. I guess there's not point talking to you. I'm sorry to bring facts to your ignorance jamboree.

Tell me about Obama's birth certificate, why don't you?

Does this mean that you have a comment about the two links that I posted, or that you have other information to share? Or do you just feel better for having called me an idiot?

What would you like to know about Obama's birth certificate?Look, I know you're a douche that has no intention of living in a world bound by the dictates of fact and reality. I know you'll simply ignore what I write here because you're so weak and angry that nothing can change the narrative of throbbing stupidity that constantly runs through your squinting, frothing melon. But still, I'll address your bullshit on the merits. Because I'm compulsive this way.

Hoekstra and Santorum showed up on a news conference waving a report that was already public and saying, "We found us the WMD! Hyuk!"

That report was the Duelfer Report (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Survey_Group).

Take some time to read and understand now. The report said that Saddam didn't have any WMDs. The report said that he destroyed them in the 90s, and was complying. The report also said that some old stockpiles of shells were left to rot in places. Apparently as an oversight.

Imagine someone pulls a gun on you and says, "Destroy all the issues of Angry, Incoherent Bitch Monthly that you have in your trailer."

Imagine you comply, you take them off your bookshelf and pull them from the nightstand and burn the whole bunch. You cancel your subscription and you generally do what he asks. But then, years later the guy with the gun is back and he searches your house and finds a copy of Angry Incoherent Bitch Monthly under your sink. The pages are swelled shut and you can barely make out the cover, but he's saying that you have a stockpile. When in actuality you just forgot you dropped one there.

Iraq is a country of 20 million people. Saddam did get rid of his stockpiles and programs. But some units somewhere either didn't comply, didn't read the labels, or just fucking made a mistake. And for 20 years a tiny, tiny fucking amount of sensitive material was degrading out in the environment. The shells that were left couldn't be fired. They weren't at potency and they were rusted like the Trans Am in your mom's front yard.

So please, you fucking simpleton, all I ask is that you try to learn before smugly pointing to a widely debunked news conference by a couple of lawmakers that might actually be stupider than you.

As for the second link, that's just a bunch of un-sourced paranoia.



As for the birth certificate I was wondering if you were a birther. Just trying to gauge your level of ability.

[elucidator]

Have you a container of cottage cheese available to you?

[Lobohan]

Have you a container of cottage cheese available to you?I have such a container within my grasp.

[RickJay]

[
Jesus fuck, is every single libertarian a fucking idiot?
I have to admit that drug testing for airline pilots does seem kind of stupid. Having rules about not being drunk while you're flying a plane, sure. Testing a guy to see if he's smoking pot on his downtime is a waste of money.

Or to extend the issue to truck driving, the USA forces commercial drivers to take a drug test annually; Canada does not. There is not the slightest evidence whatsoever that Canada has a problem with drug-related truck accidents as a result.

Drug tests are invasive of the 99% of people who don't have drug problems and are extremely unlikely to catch or stop the ones that do.

[emacknight]

Which can also be used to check on Morella's claim about no fatral air crashes being caused by drugs:

"In 1988, a Trans-Colorado Airlines, Fairchild Metro III, operating as Continental Express, with two crew members and 15 passengers on board, crashed short of the runway at Durango, Colorado, killing the two crew members and seven passengers. The NTSB found that the captain's use of cocaine degraded his performance and contributed to the accident (NTSB, 1989)."

[From "Alcohol and Other Drug Use in Commercial Transportation" by James Hall, the then-chair of the NTSB; found at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/s1p1.htm]
<gasp!>

So, Morella... is it that you thought you could get away with a lie, or are you just so fucking stupid that you think whatever you think is a "fact"?

Unfortunately for us, it seems Morella is back on the road (or to the skies). We were so close to fighting ignorance. Someone should wait a week and google either that part platform, or the "no drug related crashes" and see if he/she/it pops up on another board spouting the same nonsense.

[E-Sabbath]

So, Morella... is it that you thought you could get away with a lie, or are you just so fucking stupid that you think whatever you think is a "fact"?

Judging from his statement about the ethnic makeup of tea parties, the answer appears to be yes.

[DianaG]

I think the phrase you want is "Chronically and Irrevocably Stupid".
Well sure, but it seemed redundant.

The Tea Party, such as it is, is nothing more than a festival of petulance. I take them about as seriously as I take a toddler's tantrum.

[anya marie]

Morella, thanks a bunch for attacking my hygiene, and calling me a stoner.

It's so fucking nice to know that's all i can expect from you. I asked for a job, not a handout, but i suppose that means nothing to you. Thanks for clearing up the position of your fellow tea partiers, and for spouting the same bullshit about tax cuts creating jobs, certainly one doesn't get that frm MSNBC.

[The Other Jeffrey Lebowski]

Judging from his statement about the ethnic makeup of tea parties, the answer appears to be yes.

Her

[Merijeek]

Imagine you comply, you take them off your bookshelf and pull them from the nightstand and burn the whole bunch. You cancel your subscription and you generally do what he asks. But then, years later the guy with the gun is back and he searches your house and finds a copy of Angry Incoherent Bitch Monthly under your sink. The pages are swelled shut and you can barely make out the cover, but he's saying that you have a stockpile. When in actuality you just forgot you dropped one there.


Or, even more realistically, you get married and it turns out you forgot a bit of porn you had stuck somewhere out of the way.

Not that I'm speaking from experience.

-Joe

[Shot From Guns]

And your policy on charitable donation?

Unlike Rand Rover, I didn't choose a profession whose rules oblige me to perform work pro bono.

Or else what the hell is the Tea Party?

A circle jerk.

As for the racism, there are a few assholes in every crowd.

Like, demonstraby, you. And bigoted in other ways, too, apparently.

Government can do nothing but leech money from the economy. They cannot give you anything. They can only take.

So, the government is a problem because of the deficit. But the government only takes, doesn't give. I guess the disparity between intake and outlay is that they're just burning all the money, and then making more money for the express purpose of burning? Or something? You fucking retard.

IMO (in my opinion, remember) the Tea Party is a groundswell of anger at the fiscal irresponsibility with which the country has been run for decades, and was touched off by Obama and Congress with the stimulous, the bailouts and its accompanying government control of business, and the health care plan.

Ah yes. The stimulus, which was put into place by Bush. The bailouts, which were put into place by Bush. The government control of businesses, which were put into place by Bush. All of which were a reaction to the recession that began during the Bush administration. The health care plan, which is very similar to the one proposed by the Republican candidate for President. Clearly, people had a reason to be mad at Obama.

Wait, what?

Liberal's [...] motto's [...] Paul's

I appreciate the 'sentiment of thi's po'st, but for the love of god, pay more attention to where you're putting your apo'strophe's. They don't ju'st go before every 's.

And most of the Muslims that Americans hate, resent and fear are white.

Caucasian, not white. There's a big difference.

The EPA and most other regulatory agencies should be abolished. [...]
Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS. [...]
No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor.
Any person living in this country illegally should be shot.
Welfare, public education, and social security should be abolished.
No free health care, for anyone.

My god--a moron and a bigot. What are the odds!

Why should I be taxed at a larger percentage just because I work harder?

1.) "Work harder" != "make more income."

2.) Taxes go up the more income you make because the more income you make, the more discretionary income you have. Taking an extra $1,000 from someone who'd just buy a bigger TV for their kid's bedroom in the lake house is more useful than taking the $1,000 from someone who'd use it to pay their heating bill, or buy their kids' schoolbooks, or repair the vehicle they use to get to their three jobs.

Quoting Lao Tzu to support compulsive ambition as a virtue is like quotiing Ayn Rand on a Christmas card.

I have come here to say that I do not recognize anyone's right to one minute of my life.... It had to be said. The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing. Happy Holidays!

If you don't test me, you won't know.

And if you remove the regulatory agency with authority, no one will stop me.

As much as I hate to defend a troll, I think you're missing the point here. Morella isn't arguing that people should be able to operate while intoxicated--simply that our current drug tests are invasive and useless. If I test positive for marijuana, that doesn't tell you if I'm stoned right now or if I got high this weekend.

Her

Oh, is Morella a she? Where did that get said?

[Squink]

Oh, is Morella a she? Where did that get said?Obviously the female diminutive for a tasty type of mushroom, or perhaps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morella)?

[elucidator]

Oh, no you don't, SFG! We of the testosterone impaired gender take enough shit as it is, you're not shoving this one off on us! No way!

[Merijeek]

Oh, no you don't, SFG! We of the testosterone impaired gender take enough shit as it is, you're not shoving this one off on us! No way!

Holy shit, luci is a woman?

-Joe

[elucidator]

Yeah? Why don't you suck on this for a while, see if it reminds you of Mom!

[Merijeek]

Yeah? Why don't you suck on this for a while, see if it reminds you of Mom!

See, now I don't know if you're calling my mom a tranny or what.

-Joe

[The Other Jeffrey Lebowski]

Oh, is Morella a she? Where did that get said?
Sorry, my mistake; upon review, I don't believe that my new favorite poster has identified his/her gender.

[mhendo]

Sorry, my mistake; upon review, I don't believe that my new favorite poster has identified his/her gender.Actually, this post suggests that Morella is, in fact, a woman:I only allow myself and my husband a small salary, because we put all of our money into the business, and we're always working, so we don't have time to spend it anyway, yet, the taxes on my lower-middle class salary will be increased, dramatically. It is possible that Morella is a gay man who lives in a state where gay marriage is legal, but simple probability suggests that this is the less likely option.

[Lobohan]

Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS.

Actually, this post suggests that Morella is, in fact, a woman:It is possible that Morella is a gay man who lives in a state where gay marriage is legal, but simple probability suggests that this is the less likely option.It would seem that Morella is an angry homophobic bitch in addition to her other mental defects. So it would seem very unlikely that she plays for that team.

[Shot From Guns]

Obviously the female diminutive for a tasty type of mushroom, or perhaps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morella)?

Assuming gender based on names has tripped me up before, in the case of such posters as villa and Zeriel (both male, both initially assumed to be female by me).

Oh, no you don't, SFG! We of the testosterone impaired gender take enough shit as it is, you're not shoving this one off on us! No way!

It weren't me what done it! It was The Other Jeffrey Lebowski! Who was apparently correct, as mhendo observes evidentially below:

Actually, this post suggests that Morella is, in fact, a woman:[dropped quote] It is possible that Morella is a gay man who lives in a state where gay marriage is legal, but simple probability suggests that this is the less likely option.

Less than probability, I'd say the fact that she thinks that "gays" shouldn't be allowed to marry and no one else should have to pay for "their AIDS" is a pretty bit tipoff.

[mhendo]

Wow! I hadn't seen the stuff about gay marriage and paying for "their AIDS."

That bitch really is a fucking horrid piece of work.

[Merijeek]

It would seem that Morella is an angry homophobic bitch in addition to her other mental defects. So it would seem very unlikely that she plays for that team.

Probably experimented in college, got dumped, and has been pissy about "them" ever since.

Or so my Cinemax viewing would lead me to believe.

Wow! I hadn't seen the stuff about gay marriage and paying for "their AIDS."

That bitch really is a fucking horrid piece of work.

curlycoat's even more malicious twin?

-Joe

[Shot From Guns]

Less than probability

Ack, I knew something about this sentence didn't seem right. That should be "More than probability."

curlycoat's even more malicious twin?

Since curly sucks at the government teat, Morella probably thinks she should be shot.

[Merijeek]

Since curly sucks at the government teat, Morella probably thinks she should be shot.

But...I think she should be too.

-Joe

[Morella]

If you don't test me, you won't know.

And if you remove the regulatory agency with authority, no one will stop me.

Oh, ben voyons. Have you ever tried to fly out of a busy airport? If your short-term memory is not 100%, you're going to be in trouble before you get off of the ground.

If I were to hire you as an employee, I, or my designate, would know whether or not you were using drugs. Of course, I fire people for being weapons-grade stupid, regardless of the cause.

[Morella]

If you don't test me, you won't know.

And if you remove the regulatory agency with authority, no one will stop me.

Oh, ben voyons. Have you ever tried to fly out of a busy airport? If your short-term memory is not 100%, you're going to be in trouble before you get off of the ground.

If I were to hire you as an employee, I, or my designate, would know whether or not you were using drugs. Of course, I fire people for being weapons-grade stupid, regardless of the cause, and I doubt that I would hire you in the first place. Anyone dumb enough to jump onto DuPont's paranoia wagon is probably too stupid to drive a truck, fly a plane, or sweep the floor.

Next you'll be telling me you bought into DuPont's R12 "ozone layer hole" story.

[mhendo]

Of course, I fire people for being weapons-grade stupid, regardless of the cause.I assume, as owner of the business, that you give yourself a pass.

[Morella]

Last I checked, the people investigating the accidents were the FAA; a big government bureaucracy, and therefore incompetent.

Nope. The NTSB investigates airline accidents. They actually do a pretty decent job of it, one of the few allegories of good government, so to speak.

[mhendo]

Nope. The NTSB investigates airline accidents. They actually do a pretty decent job of it, one of the few allegories of good government, so to speak.I do not think this word means what you think it means.

[Morella]

<gasp!>

So, Morella... is it that you thought you could get away with a lie, or are you just so fucking stupid that you think whatever you think is a "fact"?

I thought we had decided that I was a troll. If that is true, maybe I was looking for an example of an aviation accident that was caused by drug use, to use in another forum where I am arguing the opposite point, and I knew that I could bait one of you stupid liberal fuckers into looking it up for me.

[Robot Arm]

Nope. The NTSB investigates airline accidents. They actually do a pretty decent job of it, one of the few allegories of good government, so to speak.Okay, the NTSB. My mistake.

But on the larger issue of abolishing entire government agencies, would you get rid of the FAA, the NTSB, and the National Weather Service?

[Robot Arm]

I thought we had decided that I was a troll. If that is true, maybe I was looking for an example of an aviation accident that was caused by drug use, to use in another forum where I am arguing the opposite point, and I knew that I could bait one of you stupid liberal fuckers into looking it up for me.Then we'll have to hope that your case in that forum will be better supported than the one you're making here.

And for the amount of posting you've done here to provoke the liberal fuckers, you could have saved yourself some time to just find your own cite.

[elucidator]

Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. Schrodinger's troll.

[emacknight]

Oh, ben voyons. Have you ever tried to fly out of a busy airport? If your short-term memory is not 100%, you're going to be in trouble before you get off of the ground.

C'est des conneries. So now what your saying is that pilots don't need rules about drug tests because flying is too hard to do stoned?

If I were to hire you as an employee, I, or my designate, would know whether or not you were using drugs.

How would you know? Would you use some sort of a test?

Of course, I fire people for being weapons-grade stupid, regardless of the cause.

Sure you do. We're all very impressed with how important you are. bon chance abruti

[Frank]

Of course, I fire people for being weapons-grade stupid, regardless of the cause.
Huh. Yet you still employ yourself? Go figure. No wonder your business cannot expand. It's got nothing to do with taxes.

[Morella]

C'est des conneries. So now what your saying is that pilots don't need rules about drug tests because flying is too hard to do stoned?

How would you know? Would you use some sort of a test?

Because I've been flying since long before the Golden Age of Government Control began, and I know these things. I'm not going to go into any more detail than that.

Sure you do. We're all very impressed with how important you are. bon chance abruti

Bonne Chance. Chance is feminine, connard.

[Morella]

Look, I know you're a douche that has no intention of living in a world bound by the dictates of fact and reality. I know you'll simply ignore what I write here because you're so weak and angry that nothing can change the narrative of throbbing stupidity that constantly runs through your squinting, frothing melon. But still, I'll address your bullshit on the merits. Because I'm compulsive this way.

No, I didn't ignore it. Unfortunately, it takes a little squeezin' to get you liberals to cough up anything more than your opinions, but I appreciate what little information you were willing to give me about WMD.

To tell you the truth, though, I don't really care that much whether or not Obama's war on Iraq was justified...


...or Bush Sr's, or Bush Jr's...

I have to agree with Chuck...pave the whole country over and put a gas pump on top of it.

Iraq is a country of 20 million people. Saddam did get rid of his stockpiles and programs. But some units somewhere either didn't comply, didn't read the labels, or just fucking made a mistake.

How about that Russian figher jet that they pulled out of the sand, based on a tip? What is your excuse for them having it?

As for the birth certificate I was wondering if you were a birther. Just trying to gauge your level of ability.

Oh, OK. I thought maybe you were setting me up for another strawman argument. I get a lot of that around here.

[emacknight]

Because I've been flying since long before the Golden Age of Government Control began, and I know these things. I'm not going to go into any more detail than that.

Bonne Chance. Chance is feminine, connard.

Classic.

Or should I say classique in italics for no apparent reason?

Life was so good before liberals messed it all up.

I will now bow before your awesome authority, because clearly you know these things. Nothing at all gives us doubt.

Shouldn't you be busier? It's almost as if you're not working very hard.

salope

[Morella]

Unfortunately for us, it seems Morella is back on the road (or to the skies). We were so close to fighting ignorance. Someone should wait a week and google either that part platform, or the "no drug related crashes" and see if he/she/it pops up on another board spouting the same nonsense.

I'm back, for another hour, or maybe two, then I have to blast off again.

[Frank]

Because I've been flying since long before the Golden Age of Government Control began, and I know these things. I'm not going to go into any more detail than that.
The Federal Aviation Agency was created in 1958.

Federal control of aviation began in 1926.

[emacknight]

Ever watch Battlestar Galactica? "You have to pick your side". I would be in complete agreement with a political party, that supported these ideas :

Religion is total bullshit, and should be abolished.
The EPA and most other regulatory agencies should be abolished.
All prescription drugs should be freely available to adults. No drugs should be illegal.
Gays should not be allowed to legally marry, but they can do anything else they want to do, as long as the government doesn't have to pay the bill for their AIDS.
Antitrust regulations should be toughened.
No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor.
Any person living in this country illegally should be shot.
Welfare, public education, and social security should be abolished.
No free health care, for anyone.

Does any party align with all of these ideas? No. I will vote conservative, despite the fact that I obviously disagree with much of the conservative agenda, because it is the lesser of all of the evils. I won't hate black people, and I won't praise Jesus, whether the party that I have chosen to vote for does or not. That's what we all have to do...pick our side. It's not a perfect world.

For those of you just joining us, this is our merde de jour. And we're also putting in random expressions françaises (in italics) for no apparent reason.

I'll admit, I focused on the part about shooting people, but this one is even funnier:

"No American company should be allowed to use foreign labor."

What does that even mean?

I'm not even sure how someone puts together a list like that? Has she had that kicking around in her head all these years? If I search will I find it's from yet another conservative blog?

What the fuck is wrong with our society?

[Really Not All That Bright]

The Federal Aviation Agency was created in 1958.
Morella is a dragon.

[Morella]

Morella, thanks a bunch for attacking my hygiene, and calling me a stoner.

You're welcome, Dear. If you don't want to be called a stoner, quit acting like one, requesting that everything be given to you. Go out and get what you want.

It's so fucking nice to know that's all i can expect from you. I asked for a job, not a handout, but i suppose that means nothing to you.

It might. What do you do, and why should I hire you?

Thanks for clearing up the position of your fellow tea partiers, and for spouting the same bullshit about tax cuts creating jobs, certainly one doesn't get that frm MSNBC.

I'm not a tea partier, just a businessperson trying to get by in what is a very shaky economic situation. Hopefully, we will soon, as the French said in Le Monde, get the legitimate government restored to the United States again, and business can prosper, but there is a long way to go. I doubt that most of you remember how great this country was for business in the 60's and 70's. I only wish I had been willing to work as hard as I do now, back then. I would be a billionaire.

[Cisco]

Morella is a dragon.
A fudge dragon?

[emacknight]

I'm back, for another hour, or maybe two, then I have to blast off again.

So with regards to your statement about drug related crashes, were you lying or stupid?

How many other people have to you told that to? Have you apologized to them?

Would that qualify as being "being weapons-grade stupid?"

[Cisco]

I doubt that most of you remember how great this country was for business in the 60's and 70's.
Should a country be great for business, or great for its citizens?

[Really Not All That Bright]

Hopefully, we will soon, as the French said in Le Monde, get the legitimate government restored to the United States again...
You mean, one that didn't win the popular election?

[Ludovic]

Morella is a dragon....our argument is invalid.

[Morella]

1.) "Work harder" != "make more income."


I've found that one pretty much leads to the other.

2.) Taxes go up the more income you make because the more income you make, the more discretionary income you have. Taking an extra $1,000 from someone who'd just buy a bigger TV for their kid's bedroom in the lake house is more useful than taking the $1,000 from someone who'd use it to pay their heating bill, or buy their kids' schoolbooks, or repair the vehicle they use to get to their three jobs.

What if, instead, I took the $1,000 and paid someone to move freight with it? That way, he has the $1,000 to spend on his heating bill, and I have, hopefully, made some more money that I can use to hire other employees who need jobs? Then maybe I can lease another airplane, or buy another truck, and the people who make airplanes and trucks can have jobs as well? Or would it be better for the $1,000 to go to the government, where it will be squandered on Chinese windmills and supporting people who have eight babies at a time while on welfare?

As much as I hate to defend a troll, I think you're missing the point here. Morella isn't arguing that people should be able to operate while intoxicated--simply that our current drug tests are invasive and useless. If I test positive for marijuana, that doesn't tell you if I'm stoned right now or if I got high this weekend.

Hey, we trolls can take care of ourselves. So can black people, and Obama.

[emacknight]

I doubt that most of you remember how great this country was for business in the 60's and 70's. I only wish I had been willing to work as hard as I do now, back then. I would be a billionaire.

This whole process has fit such a repetitive little narrative. And now we're at the part were today's conservative remembers fondly a time when life was good. 40, 60, maybe 80 years ago. Doesn't seem to matter at all what was going on, all that matter is that for them, life was good. And the liberals screwed it all up with their liberalism and gay sex and AIDS.

Reminds me of the movie Brain Candy, but I fear that is a cultural reference few will get.

Which makes me wonder, what will today's young conservatives think back to when they're old? Will there be a time in 40 years when yet another idiot says, "remember how great it was in 2010?"