Socialist Party USA says Obama isn't one of them

[native]

Goldman Sachs won't let it happen.

He might not get support from the party but Republican voters and independents would support him well. I know I could look past his social conservatism.

See, there is common ground--Ron Paul.

I have no problems with Ron Paul as a person or politician, and few problems with most of his policy positions. Paulistas, however, have a long way to go before they can be taken seriously by mainstream Republicans, conservatives and independents.

[kalm]

See, there is common ground--Ron Paul.

I have no problems with Ron Paul as a person or politician, and few problems with most of his policy positions. Paulistas, however, have a long way to go before they can be taken seriously by mainstream Republicans, conservatives and independents.

Which means you would vote for him. Are Paulistas the candidate or is Ron Paul?

[JMU DJ]

I don't know what this is supposed to be? ...

I agree with your post!
I honor you for making the post.
The Simon Cowell suggestion is funny!
It's really fvcking funny!
It's also kinda true...
Wait a minute...
That's fvcked up!
...and sad!
...tragic, in fact!
It pisses me off that we are that stupid!

Touche, you can work for my company. How does Latex Salesman sound?

[Chizzang]

I have no problems with Ron Paul as a person or politician, and few problems with most of his policy positions. Paulistas, however, have a long way to go before they can be taken seriously by mainstream Republicans, conservatives and independents.

Ron Paul is one of only a tiny tiny few politicians who isn't completely full of sh!t... Present administration included

I like his stance on the Fed
I like his stance on Homeland security
I like his stance on the Pentagon and Military

And he does not appear to be under control of any particular lobby group (which is extremely rare) Let me be clear however - of the two guys running for president last year we got the better of the two by a huge margin...

If the Republican Party even wants to have a chance in 4 years Ron Paul should be looked at seriously...

[ASUMountaineer]

See, there is common ground--Ron Paul.

I have no problems with Ron Paul as a person or politician, and few problems with most of his policy positions. Paulistas, however, have a long way to go before they can be taken seriously by mainstream Republicans, conservatives and independents.

I feel the same way about many Teabaggers--but none of them are on the ballot.

[native]

I have no problems with Ron Paul as a person or politician, and few problems with most of his policy positions. Paulistas, however, have a long way to go before they can be taken seriously by mainstream Republicans, conservatives and independents.

I feel the same way about many Teabaggers--but none of them are on the ballot.

What kind of false flags are you flying, Mountaineer? You claim to be both Christian and conservative, but neither type of person would be so overtly and viscerally hostile to tea party participants.

Disagree? Yes. Sure.

Dismissive and hostile? No.

[native]

I have no problems with Ron Paul as a person or politician, and few problems with most of his policy positions. Paulistas, however, have a long way to go before they can be taken seriously by mainstream Republicans, conservatives and independents.

Ron Paul is one of only a tiny tiny few politicians who isn't completely full of sh!t... Present administration included

I like his stance on the Fed
I like his stance on Homeland security
I like his stance on the Pentagon and Military

And he does not appear to be under control of any particular lobby group (which is extremely rare) Let me be clear however - of the two guys running for president last year we got the better of the two by a huge margin...

If the Republican Party even wants to have a chance in 4 years Ron Paul should be looked at seriously...

I am hoping Ron Paul makes the ticket.

The only good thing about Obama's election, however, is the exposure of his bankrupt and fraudulent "progressive" ideas and policies for what they are to the sleepy and/or creepy idiots who voted for him in the first place.

[ASUMountaineer]

I feel the same way about many Teabaggers--but none of them are on the ballot.

What kind of false flags are you flying, Mountaineer? You claim to be both Christian and conservative, but neither type of person would be so overtly and viscerally hostile to tea party participants.

Disagree? Yes. Sure.

Dismissive and hostile? No.

Again, the same could be said for your comment about "Paulistas."

First, do not question my faith. I don't question yours, I expect the same in return. I've never met you, how is it you think you can judge my heart? What political party was Jesus a member of? My faith is not determined by your approval. Your arrogance is showing.

Second, how was my comment above any more "overtly and viscerally hostile" than yours regarding Paulistas? Where is the hostility in my comment above? My other comments on this board, regarding tea party participants, have not been "overtly and viscerally hostile" either. I have questioned their motives, and asked where they were when Bush was bringing them "Socialism." If that is what you're discussing, you really need to learn what "hostile" means. Of course, I'm still waiting to hear their answer to the Bush question (which has yet to happen).

Third, I'm not flying false flags (pot meet kettle). I think my stances on this board and AGS over the past 5 years have "proven" my "conservative credentials." Luckily, my goal in life is not to gain your approval. However, because you asked. If the tea party participants put their money where their mouths are and actually vote third party in November, I'll stand corrected and be happy (because voting for most Republicans in Congress now is to vote for what they're rallying against). As it is, they are about 9 years late to the party. In their "platform" the "top ten issues" does not include ending America's role as the police of the world. That prevents me from being real supportive of the movement. Yelling about socialism, big government, lower taxes, and the such are great. And, I agree, but (as I've asked numerous times) where were they for the past decade? Again, I don't see the hostility in my statements (perhaps you're a little oversensitive--especially for someone who claims not to be a tea party participant). My being dismissive has nothing to do with being a Christian.

You need to get off of your high horse.

[ASUMountaineer]

Ron Paul is one of only a tiny tiny few politicians who isn't completely full of sh!t... Present administration included

I like his stance on the Fed
I like his stance on Homeland security
I like his stance on the Pentagon and Military

And he does not appear to be under control of any particular lobby group (which is extremely rare) Let me be clear however - of the two guys running for president last year we got the better of the two by a huge margin...

If the Republican Party even wants to have a chance in 4 years Ron Paul should be looked at seriously...

I am hoping Ron Paul makes the ticket.

The only good thing about Obama's election, however, is the exposure of his bankrupt and fraudulent "progressive" ideas and policies for what they are to the sleepy and/or creepy idiots who voted for him in the first place.

Especially Obama's ideas and policies like: the PATRIOT Act, the Prescription Drug benefit, warrantless wiretapping, and a military "surge."

You see native, this is exactly what has prompted my "dismissive and hostile" (as you say) position about the tea party participants. Again, where were they when these policies were being implemented by a Republican?

These policies are what pushed me to start voting for libertarians--and that happened before 2008. Acting as if the "bankrupt and fraudulent" policies started with Obama is naive at best, and down right idiotic at worst. If that's being "hostile," fine. But, you can't dispute that the policies above were just as bankrupt and fraudulent as Obama's current policies and ideas.

[native]

I agree with your post!
I honor you for making the post.
The Simon Cowell suggestion is funny!
It's really fvcking funny!
It's also kinda true...
Wait a minute...
That's fvcked up!
...and sad!
...tragic, in fact!
It pisses me off that we are that stupid!

Touche, you can work for my company. How does Latex Salesman sound?

You might have to explain the market to me.

[native]

What kind of false flags are you flying, Mountaineer? You claim to be both Christian and conservative, but neither type of person would be so overtly and viscerally hostile to tea party participants.

Disagree? Yes. Sure.

Dismissive and hostile? No.

Again, the same could be said for your comment about "Paulistas."

First, do not question my faith. I don't question yours, I expect the same in return. I've never met you, how is it you think you can judge my heart? What political party was Jesus a member of? My faith is not determined by your approval. Your arrogance is showing.
....

On Paulistas: I am a libertarian at heart and have been predisposed to support Ron Paul ever since I started learning about him several years ago. I am NOT hostile or dismissive towards libertarians or libertarian ideas. I deeply admire Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. My personal experiences with Ron Paul activists are limited to watching those at CPAC on TV, bloggers on a conservative blog site, and a few dozen volunteers during the 2008 election cycle. With maybe one exception, I really liked what I saw at CPAC and hope that liberty-minded Republicans will be successful in challenging the fat and happy Republican leadership in forming a more lean and pro-Constitutional policy platform.

However, with few exceptions, the Ron Paul activists with whom I have personally interacted in the last two years routinely fail to live up to his standards of honesty, intellect, collegiality and decency. (Not many people do!) As a practical matter, people seeking to build sustainable and successful political movements must represent themselves honestly, find common ground and build coalitions. This goes for Paulistas as well as Tea Partiers.

On YOUR Christian faith: Calm down on the Christianity thing. My post was a modest challenge of your expressed behavior, NOT a challenge to your faith or heart as you so dramatically claim. You can call yourself anything you want, but do not misconstrue my modest criticism as approval or disapproval of your faith. I understand and respect your disagreement, but I do not understand your visceral hostility. It is not consistent with what I have observed for five (corrected) decades among Christians of all political persuasions and denominations. If you were to criticize my expressions of overt hostility to be non-Christian, you would be correct in your assessment.

[native]

What kind of false flags are you flying, Mountaineer? You claim to be both Christian and conservative, but neither type of person would be so overtly and viscerally hostile to tea party participants.

Disagree? Yes. Sure.

Dismissive and hostile? No.

... Second, how was my comment above any more "overtly and viscerally hostile" than yours regarding Paulistas? Where is the hostility in my comment above? ...

The term "teabagger" is overtly and viscerally hostile, and does not accurately reflect tea party activities or mentality. If this is not your intent, please use another term and accept my apology.

Do you consider the term "Paulista" equally demeaning? I do not. "Paulista" does not suggest irrelevant or peculiar sexual activities, but it does accurately reflect the stridence of many Ron Paul supporters. If channeled properly, stridence is not a bad thing. You do remember what Barry Goldwater, a true libertarian-Republican, said about liberty?

I would also note that it is obvious in the context of my post that I admire Ron Paul.

[native]

I am hoping Ron Paul makes the ticket.

The only good thing about Obama's election, however, is the exposure of his bankrupt and fraudulent "progressive" ideas and policies for what they are to the sleepy and/or creepy idiots who voted for him in the first place.

Especially Obama's ideas and policies like: the PATRIOT Act, the Prescription Drug benefit, warrantless wiretapping, and a military "surge."

You see native, this is exactly what has prompted my "dismissive and hostile" (as you say) position about the tea party participants. Again, where were they when these policies were being implemented by a Republican?

These policies are what pushed me to start voting for libertarians--and that happened before 2008. Acting as if the "bankrupt and fraudulent" policies started with Obama is naive at best, and down right idiotic at worst. If that's being "hostile," fine. But, you can't dispute that the policies above were just as bankrupt and fraudulent as Obama's current policies and ideas.

If I understand your post correctly, I agree that the tea party movement has thus far failed to come to grips with the dichotomies of some of their positions, e.g., disparagement of socialism while supporting no changes in Social Security and Medicare.

Although Obama is certainly guilty of initiating his own bankrupt and fraudulent policies, I DO NOT make the claim that Obama initiated all the bankrupt and fraudulent policies currently oppressing America.

I do claim that Obama's performance is quantitatively and qualitatively worse than Bush's. Each of the policies you list deserves its own detailed discussion. It is ironic that Tea Party protesters you detest often share your hostility to Bush policies. However, it is not remarkable that it took several years for the Tea Party to build a head of steam. The Tea Party activists are no more guilty in this regard than are the former Obama supporters now showing buyer's remorse.

[Chizzang]

It is ironic that Tea Party protesters you detest often share your hostility to Bush policies. However, it is not remarkable that it took several years for the Tea Party to build a head of steam. The Tea Party activists are no more guilty in this regard than are the former Obama supporters now showing buyer's remorse.

Ha ha ha... you make me happy native
Yeah nothing like a black liberal to help you "build a head of steam" on policies and practices that are now almost a decade old

[Grizalltheway]

It is ironic that Tea Party protesters you detest often share your hostility to Bush policies. However, it is not remarkable that it took several years for the Tea Party to build a head of steam. The Tea Party activists are no more guilty in this regard than are the former Obama supporters now showing buyer's remorse.

Ha ha ha... you make me happy native
Yeah nothing like a black liberal to help you "build a head of steam" on policies and practices that are now almost a decade old

Careful Cleetsy, just insinuating that some teabaggers might be racially motivated is enough to get you labeled a racist by the AZGrizFans and grizzaholics of this board (I guess you missed the memo )

[ASUMountaineer]

Again, the same could be said for your comment about "Paulistas."

First, do not question my faith. I don't question yours, I expect the same in return. I've never met you, how is it you think you can judge my heart? What political party was Jesus a member of? My faith is not determined by your approval. Your arrogance is showing.
....

On Paulistas: I am a libertarian at heart and have been predisposed to support Ron Paul ever since I started learning about him several years ago. I am NOT hostile or dismissive towards libertarians or libertarian ideas. I deeply admire Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. My personal experiences with Ron Paul activists are limited to watching those at CPAC on TV, bloggers on a conservative blog site, and a few dozen volunteers during the 2008 election cycle. With maybe one exception, I really liked what I saw at CPAC and hope that liberty-minded Republicans will be successful in challenging the fat and happy Republican leadership in forming a more lean and pro-Constitutional policy platform.

However, with few exceptions, the Ron Paul activists with whom I have personally interacted in the last two years routinely fail to live up to his standards of honesty, intellect, collegiality and decency. (Not many people do!) As a practical matter, people seeking to build sustainable and successful political movements must represent themselves honestly, find common ground and build coalitions. This goes for Paulistas as well as Tea Partiers. (so where is my hostility different from yours?)

On YOUR Christian faith: Calm down on the Christianity thing. My post was a modest challenge of your expressed behavior, NOT a challenge to your faith or heart as you so dramatically claim. You can call yourself anything you want, but do not misconstrue my modest criticism as approval or disapproval of your faith. I understand and respect your disagreement, but I do not understand your visceral hostility. It is not consistent with what I have observed for ten decades among Christians of all political persuasions and denominations. If you were to criticize my expressions of overt hostility to be non-Christian, you would be correct in your assessment.

You're 100 years old? Anyways, I'm not being dramatic, just stating my opinion. Not once did I bring your religious beliefs into it. Not sure what your assessment of my "claims" regarding Christianity has to do with anything dealing with tea party participants. Apparently, my disagreement with tea party participants motives upsets you. However, my "hostility" is no different than yours--fact. You keep going with this "visceral hostility" thing. You need to get over it. It's a message board, there's no hostility, quit being so dramatic.

[Chizzang]

Ha ha ha... you make me happy native
Yeah nothing like a black liberal to help you "build a head of steam" on policies and practices that are now almost a decade old

Careful Cleetsy, just insinuating that some teabaggers might be racially motivated is enough to get you labeled a racist by the AZGrizFans and grizzaholics of this board (I guess you missed the memo )

Hey more power to the Tea Party...
I'm glad they finally took the word nigger off of their signs though - that's a step in the right direction
but the idea that it took them 8 years to build a head of steam is laughable
Bush practiced overt socialism for two complete terms... and not a peep

examples:
-Cash incentives paid to the lower income (incentive checks) taken from my bank account
-Huge deficit spending
-Enlarging the size and scope of the Federal governments responsibility
-Record Spending
-No Veto on any pork loaded spending bills for 6 years straight
-The entire patriot act is really more like a communist dictatorship act

gosh.. it's taken a while - a decade actually - to get a head of steam...
anything but admit what this is really about

-

[ASUMountaineer]

... Second, how was my comment above any more "overtly and viscerally hostile" than yours regarding Paulistas? Where is the hostility in my comment above? ...

The term "teabagger" is overtly and viscerally hostile , and does not accurately reflect tea party activities or mentality. If this is not your intent, please use another term and accept my apology. See my further explanation below as to a reason to call them teabaggers.

Do you consider the term "Paulista" equally demeaning? I do not. "Paulista" does not suggest irrelevant or peculiar sexual activities, but it does accurately reflect the stridence of many Ron Paul supporters. If channeled properly, stridence is not a bad thing. You do remember what Barry Goldwater, a true libertarian-Republican, said about liberty?

People have dressed up as teabags at these rallies, they've hung teabags from their hats. Apparently, they like being teabaggers. I'm not using it in a sexual connotation. Perhaps you should remove your mind out of the gutter. I think it's a cool name for them.

I would also note that it is obvious in the context of my post that I admire Ron Paul.

Wow, and you say I'm dramatic? Teabagger is overtly and viscerally hostile?

I'm not being demeaning, get a grip. I don't dislike tea party participants, I think they make some valid points. But, I also find it interesting they didn't "build up steam" until after November 2008. And, as I've said numerous times, if they vote third party in November, I'll stand corrected. Anyways, I'll just agree to disagree. Have a good weekend native.

[native]

The term "teabagger" is overtly and viscerally hostile, and does not accurately reflect tea party activities or mentality. If this is not your intent, please use another term and accept my apology.

Do you consider the term "Paulista" equally demeaning? I do not. "Paulista" does not suggest irrelevant or peculiar sexual activities, but it does accurately reflect the stridence of many Ron Paul supporters. If channeled properly, stridence is not a bad thing. You do remember what Barry Goldwater, a true libertarian-Republican, said about liberty?

I would also note that it is obvious in the context of my post that I admire Ron Paul.

Wow, and you say I'm dramatic? Teabagger is overtly and viscerally hostile?

I'm not being demeaning, get a grip. I don't dislike tea party participants, I think they make some valid points. But, I also find it interesting they didn't "build up steam" until after November 2008. And, as I've said numerous times, if they vote third party in November, I'll stand corrected. Anyways, I'll just agree to disagree. Have a good weekend native.

"TEABAGGER"

Yes of course the term "teabagger" is overtly and viscerally hostile! Just because some Tea Partiers demonstrate a self-deprecating sense of humor and an ability to roll with the punches does not make the term less demeaning. Do you not understand its etymology? According to wiki, it is a "slang term for the act of a man placing his scrotum in the mouth of a sexual partner....used to ridicule those in the Tea Party movement." That is exactly how it was intended when the first used by the left to describe Tea Partiers. There are no alternate definitions.

Would you choose use the word in a church sermon? ...to describe Tea Partiers in a TV interview? ...to describe your own mom and dad? ...to describe your neighbor? Can you not grasp that many among the mostly older and traditional Tea Party crowd often find the term to be egregiously hostile and degrading? ...perhaps even those who turn it into a joke? If I called you a dickhead, would you find it endearing, if I intended it as such? I think not.

THIRD PARTY "PROOF"

Why would or should Tea Party participants vote third party when they are already becoming successful in shaping Republican primaries such as in the Florida senatorial contest? What would it prove to you? There will obviously be some places in the next couple of election cycles where a third Tea Party candidate can be successful. However, at this point what do you imagine voting for a third party in a place like California will accomplish? Do you think it would be a good thing to throw the gubernatorial election to Jerry Brown?

DRAMA

The "drama" is not in the use of the word "teabagger," it is in imagining that I attacked your faith, which I did not.

AGREE? DISAGREE?

I do not understand what you really stand for, Mountaineer. Most policy differences between us seem to be a matter of priority and degree. What is it that you really want to disagree about, other than your insistence that the word "teabagger" is a term of endearment?

[native]

Careful Cleetsy, just insinuating that some teabaggers might be racially motivated is enough to get you labeled a racist by the AZGrizFans and grizzaholics of this board (I guess you missed the memo )

Hey more power to the Tea Party...
I'm glad they finally took the word nigger off of their signs though - that's a step in the right direction
but the idea that it took them 8 years to build a head of steam is laughable
Bush practiced overt socialism for two complete terms... and not a peep

examples:
-Cash incentives paid to the lower income (incentive checks) taken from my bank account
-Huge deficit spending
-Enlarging the size and scope of the Federal governments responsibility
-Record Spending
-No Veto on any pork loaded spending bills for 6 years straight
-The entire patriot act is really more like a communist dictatorship act

gosh.. it's taken a while - a decade actually - to get a head of steam...
anything but admit what this is really about

-

The Tea Party signs got cleaned up when they finally wised up and kicked out your agitprop buddies, Cleets. Are you one of the party crashers?

What is the Tea Party "really about," Cleets? You really think there are no significant qualitative or quantitative differences between Bush and Obama? Do you not think the movement would be just as vociferous if Bill or Hilary Clinton were President executing the same policies with the same lack of acumen as Obama? I wish you could live in a gulag for a year. It would do wonders for your powers of discernment.

[Chizzang]

Do you know who this guys is native..?
Dale Robertson, the man who claims to be the "President and Founder of the Tea Party"

[Chizzang]

Record federal government growth in size and scope of control under Bush
yet no protest and = no tea party...

[Chizzang]

6 consecutive years of no Bush veto's on spending bills.... zero veto's
Record federal spending = no protests = no tea party

[native]

Do you know who this guys is native..?
Dale Robertson, the man who claims to be the "President and Founder of the Tea Party"
...

I don't know Dale. His provocative use of the mis-spelled n-word would not be my first choice, but it is certainly not used in a racist way. Do you think he might have gotten the idea from my neighbor Mason Weaver?

Mason Weaver San Diego Tea Party address: "...the Master believes that every problem facing you requires him to act..."

http://vodpod.com/watch/1894723-mason-w ... ly-11-2009" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chizzang]

Do you know who this guys is native..?
Dale Robertson, the man who claims to be the "President and Founder of the Tea Party"
...

I don't know Dale. His provocative use of the mis-spelled n-word would not be my first choice, but it is certainly not used in a racist way. Do you think he might have gotten the idea from my neighbor Mason Weaver?

Mason Weaver San Diego Tea Party address: "...the Master believes that every problem facing you requires him to act..."

Yes I agree - none of your previous points are valid
thank you for continuing to embarrass yourself