Socialist Party USA says Obama isn't one of them

[native]

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

Our legislators and President are meant to be the guardians of our freedom, not the engineers of our lives… or merchants who trade entitlements for power.

[JMU DJ]

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

Our legislators and President are meant to be the guardians of our freedom, not the engineers of our lives… or merchants who trade entitlements for power.

So it's convenient for you to feel this way now, and bring up what the legislators and president are supposed to do... got it.

[Chizzang]

Our legislators and President are meant to be the guardians of our freedom, not the engineers of our lives… or merchants who trade entitlements for power.

So it's convenient for you to feel this way now, and bring up what the legislators and president are supposed to do... got it.

Right.. because when the guy you voted for passes the Patriot Act and spends record dollars and doesn't veto a spending bill for six years straight and gives federal socialized money out of my bank account as a "stimulus check" that's all okay...

because it took 9 years to build a head of steam...

The truth of the matter is so obvious and in plain sight

[native]

...Right.. because when the guy you voted for passes the Patriot Act and spends record dollars and doesn't veto a spending bill for six years straight and gives federal socialized money out of my bank account as a "stimulus check" that's all okay...

NO! It's not OK.

[native]

Our legislators and President are meant to be the guardians of our freedom, not the engineers of our lives… or merchants who trade entitlements for power.

So it's convenient for you to feel this way now, and bring up what the legislators and president are supposed to do... got it.

DJ, I have felt the same way my entire adult life, including the 2000 and 2004 elections. On the level of style, I thought the contest between Bush and Gore in 2000 was a Sophie's choice. In my voting habits and to the extent that I have been able to participate in precinct and central committee politics, I have also acted consistently with my beliefs.

For the record, I also see substantial qualitative and quantitative differences between many Bush and Obama policies. However, just because Obama is worse than Bush, that does not make Bush right. Over the course of his Presidency, I opposed some of Bush's policies, but not all of them.

As for other Republican leaders, I admire Newt Gingrich's performance as Speaker of the House, because he helped the Republican Congresses of the 90's keep most of their promises, and hold down spending. I do not hold the Republican Congresses of Bush's Presidency in the same regard.

[JMU DJ]

For the record, I also see substantial qualitative and quantitative differences between many Bush and Obama policies. However, just because Obama is worse than Bush, that does not make Bush right. Over the course of his Presidency, I opposed some of Bush's policies, but not all of them.

As for other Republican leaders, I admire Newt Gingrich's performance as Speaker of the House, because he helped the Republican Congresses of the 90's keep most of their promises, and hold down spending. I do not hold the Republican Congresses of Bush's Presidency in the same regard.

Worse than Bush? Eh, that's in the eye of the beholder... Bush did a lot in his eight years, Barry has only been in office two. I would say Obama has made a nice dent with his backoe, but he hasn't gotten Bush's wrecking ball out of the closet yet. Again, if you were distraught with Bush Policy, Bush Socialism, and Unconstitutional Bush... where was the Tea Party then? I guess they were relegated to the "Free Speech Zones."

[ASUMountaineer]

"TEABAGGER"

Yes of course the term "teabagger" is overtly and viscerally hostile! This is a message board. I disagree that my use was "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. Says you, but, I've yet to see where you're an established authority on such definitions and uses of words, same with Wiki. Below is why I use the term "teabagger." Don't like it? Oh well.



If you were going to assume that I meant "teabagger" in a sexual, demeaning way then why did you say:

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.

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? This is a message board, not church. In church today (yes I do go to church--believe it or not), I did not use the term teabagger. However, I also wouldn't say "damn," "shit," or "ass" in church, but I do on a message board. That position of your argument is weak. They probably would not find it hostile and degrading on a message board....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. AZ calls me a fucker all the time, and I return the favor, and we do so as a "term of endearment." Don't believe me, ask him. However, you seem to think you know me pretty well, so you should have known the answer.

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?

Well, considering the current platform of the Republican Party, I don't see how tea partiers could vote for most Republican candidates. So, if they're going to bring about real change, they have to hurt the party where it hurts the most--in votes. Otherwise, what's the point? Sometimes, I think acting on principle is more important. That's what it would take to prove to me that their motives aren't just anti-Obama, but truly anti-big government, anti-big spending, etc. I didn't ask you to agree with it, it's my opinion. Like assholes, we all have one.

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. Of course you did, by stating I "claim" to be a "Christian" and a "Conservative." Doing as such implies a disbelief in my "claims." However, you expect me to believe you that you weren't questioning my faith. I guess I should expect you to believe me that my calling tea party participants "teabaggers" was not with a sexual connotation. I don't really care what you think about me, but I'll call you out when need be.

AGREE? DISAGREE?

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

You're the one that started the disagreement over my use of the word "teabagger." Didn't see much else to disagree with, but you brought it up. I've stated here numerous times what I stand for. However, if you really want to know, I can post some popular topics and my beliefs/ stances. This whole little bitchfest hasn't been about policies, but about you being offended (I guess) by the term "teabagger." The tea partiers have some valid points, but I have chosen a "wait and see" approach with them. I do have questions about their motives, and why it took nine years to "build steam."

Look native, I've said my peace on this subject. I'm done, mainly because, I just don't care enough. I'm sure we'll disagree somewhere else in the future, and we can debate again then. As for this, I'm moving on. I said yesterday I hope you had a great weekend. I hope what's left of it is good.

[native]

"TEABAGGER"

Yes of course the term "teabagger" is overtly and viscerally hostile! This is a message board. I disagree that my use was "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. Says you, but, I've yet to see where you're an established authority on such definitions and uses of words, same with Wiki. Below is why I use the term "teabagger." Don't like it? Oh well.



If you were going to assume that I meant "teabagger" in a sexual, demeaning way then why did you say:



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? This is a message board, not church. In church today (yes I do go to church--believe it or not), I did not use the term teabagger. However, I also wouldn't say "damn," "****," or "ass" in church, but I do on a message board. That position of your argument is weak. They probably would not find it hostile and degrading on a message board....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. AZ calls me a **** all the time, and I return the favor, and we do so as a "term of endearment." Don't believe me, ask him. However, you seem to think you know me pretty well, so you should have known the answer.

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?

Well, considering the current platform of the Republican Party, I don't see how tea partiers could vote for most Republican candidates. So, if they're going to bring about real change, they have to hurt the party where it hurts the most--in votes. Otherwise, what's the point? Sometimes, I think acting on principle is more important. That's what it would take to prove to me that their motives aren't just anti-Obama, but truly anti-big government, anti-big spending, etc. I didn't ask you to agree with it, it's my opinion. Like *******, we all have one.

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. Of course you did, by stating I "claim" to be a "Christian" and a "Conservative." Doing as such implies a disbelief in my "claims." However, you expect me to believe you that you weren't questioning my faith. I guess I should expect you to believe me that my calling tea party participants "teabaggers" was not with a sexual connotation. So, if you don't believe me, I'll return the favor. I don't really care what you think about me, but I'll call you out when need be.

AGREE? DISAGREE?

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

You're the one that started the disagreement over my use of the word "teabagger." Didn't see much else to disagree with, but you brought it up. I've stated here numerous times what I stand for. However, if you really want to know, I can post some popular topics and my beliefs/ stances. This whole little bitchfest hasn't been about policies, but about you being offended (I guess) by the term "teabagger." The tea partiers have some valid points, but I have chosen a "wait and see" approach with them. I do have questions about their motives, and why it took nine years to "build steam."

Look native, I've said my peace on this subject. I'm done, mainly because, I just don't care enough. I'm sure we'll disagree somewhere else in the future, and we can debate again then. As for this, I'm moving on. I said yesterday I hope you had a great weekend. I hope what's left of it is good.

I am sorry you are so upset. No intention to ruin your weekend. I have come to expect measured and thoughtful posts by you, Mountaineer, which sets you apart from the majority of the fart-lighters on this board. Your use of the word caught me by surprise. If you find an alternate definition let us know.

[native]

...considering the current platform of the Republican Party, I don't see how tea partiers could vote for most Republican candidates. ...

Here is the portion of the 2008 Republican platform that addresses federal spending. What part of this platform do you imagine clashes with Tea Party issues?

* We favor adoption of the Balanced Budget Amendment to require a balanced federal budget except in time of war.
* Earmarking must stop. To eliminate wasteful projects and pay-offs to special interests, we will impose an immediate moratorium on the earmarking system and reform the appropriations process through full transparency. Tax dollars must be distributed on the basis of clear national priorities, not a politician’s seniority or party position.
* Government waste must be taken off auto-pilot. We call for a one-year pause in non-defense, non-veterans discretionary spending to force a critical, cost-benefit review of all current programs.
* We call for a constitutionally sound presidential line-item veto.
* If billions are worth spending, they should be spent in the light of day. We will insist that, before either the House or Senate considers a spending bill, every item in it should be presented in advance to the taxpayers on the Internet.
* Because the problem is too much spending, not too few taxes, we support a supermajority requirement in both the House and Senate to guard against tax hikes.
* New authorizations should be offset by reducing another program, and no appropriation should be permitted without a current authorization.
* Congressional ethics rules governing special interests should apply across the board, without the special exemptions now granted to favored institutions.
* We support the Government Shutdown Protection Act to ensure the continuance of essential federal functions when advocates of pork threaten to shut down the government unless their wasteful spending is accepted.
* We will insist that the budget reasonably plan for the long-term costs of pension and health care programs and urge the conversion of such programs to defined contribution programs.

http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/GovernmentReform.htm#1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ASUMountaineer]

You're the one that started the disagreement over my use of the word "teabagger." Didn't see much else to disagree with, but you brought it up. I've stated here numerous times what I stand for. However, if you really want to know, I can post some popular topics and my beliefs/ stances. This whole little bitchfest hasn't been about policies, but about you being offended (I guess) by the term "teabagger." The tea partiers have some valid points, but I have chosen a "wait and see" approach with them. I do have questions about their motives, and why it took nine years to "build steam."

Look native, I've said my peace on this subject. I'm done, mainly because, I just don't care enough. I'm sure we'll disagree somewhere else in the future, and we can debate again then. As for this, I'm moving on. I said yesterday I hope you had a great weekend. I hope what's left of it is good.

I am sorry you are so upset. No intention to ruin your weekend. I have come to expect measured and thoughtful posts by you, Mountaineer, which sets you apart from the majority of the fart-lighters on this board. Your use of the word caught me by surprise. If you find an alternate definition let us know.

I'm not upset, native. I have explained to you why (and what the intended meaning was) I used the term.

I had a pleasant weekend. We visited and stayed the weekend at my parents' house in Greensboro. We had a birthday cookout at my grandparents' for my grandfather's 79th birthday and my mom's birthday. I got to ride in the hotrod my brother has almost finished building from the ground up. Watched my mom sing and saw a lot of old friends at their (my childhood) church today.

[ASUMountaineer]

...considering the current platform of the Republican Party, I don't see how tea partiers could vote for most Republican candidates. ...

Here is the portion of the 2008 Republican platform that addresses federal spending. What part of this platform do you imagine clashes with Tea Party issues?

* We favor adoption of the Balanced Budget Amendment to require a balanced federal budget except in time of war.
* Earmarking must stop. To eliminate wasteful projects and pay-offs to special interests, we will impose an immediate moratorium on the earmarking system and reform the appropriations process through full transparency. Tax dollars must be distributed on the basis of clear national priorities, not a politician’s seniority or party position.
* Government waste must be taken off auto-pilot. We call for a one-year pause in non-defense, non-veterans discretionary spending to force a critical, cost-benefit review of all current programs.
* We call for a constitutionally sound presidential line-item veto.
* If billions are worth spending, they should be spent in the light of day. We will insist that, before either the House or Senate considers a spending bill, every item in it should be presented in advance to the taxpayers on the Internet.
* Because the problem is too much spending, not too few taxes, we support a supermajority requirement in both the House and Senate to guard against tax hikes.
* New authorizations should be offset by reducing another program, and no appropriation should be permitted without a current authorization.
* Congressional ethics rules governing special interests should apply across the board, without the special exemptions now granted to favored institutions.
* We support the Government Shutdown Protection Act to ensure the continuance of essential federal functions when advocates of pork threaten to shut down the government unless their wasteful spending is accepted.
* We will insist that the budget reasonably plan for the long-term costs of pension and health care programs and urge the conversion of such programs to defined contribution programs.

http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/GovernmentReform.htm#1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, the only "issues" I can find that the Tea Party is about is in the Contract From America you posted. The Charlotte Tea Party site and National Tea Party site don't have much. Based on the Contract From America, there appears to be very little. However, based on recent actions by the Republicans in power, it appears there are some issues they would be at odds over. Those actions, though, are not the official platform of the RP.

I will say, the Republicans supported the prescription-drug benefit, no mention if they still do (I assume so by the inaction to repeal). I would doubt the tea partiers would support the PDB. I also would be surprised if the tea partiers support renewing the PATRIOT Act, which the Republican Party does (which is quite costly). There is no mention in the Republican Platform you posted calling for single-rate tax reform plan or any tax reform (other than cuts/ supermajority required to raise taxes). There is also no mention of energy issues (cap & trade, nuclear) in the Republican platform.

I do know that there are many tea party supporters who want defense spending cut. That is not mentioned above. But, as I said, there is no official Tea Party Platform, so it's hard to say what their issues are. I would assume their issues vary based on tea partier and tea parties. I am still closer to a Republican than a Democrat. However, I choose to be neither, because I disagree with both parties on the most important issues to me. As I have said, the Tea Party movement has some valid points that I agree with. We'll have to wait and see what happens. If the Tea Party gets the Republicans to act like true conservatives, I will dress in a tea bag . If they form their own party and adopt a true conservative platform, I'd sign up. Until then, I'm waiting to see if they hold true.