Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
Brooklynian » Forum » Brooklyn Politics »
-
Next time there are Republican primaries, I'm considering donating money to these fools. Some are going to win their general elections, but many are going to give a position in office to a Democrat who would have otherwise lost (coughcoughHarryReid). It's my Sarah Palin strategy. I hope to Jah that she wins the Repub nomination in 2012.
-
Dems have been fucking up royally for the past 10 years though, how is this a win for the country I'm pretty sure a Dem majority Congress ushered in the Patriot Act, corporate bailouts on the backs of American tax payers, the legislation that helped prompt the housing bubble & burst, etc etc I'm no fan of the Repubs either but if you want to see what a Democratic majority looks like, just take a look at the accomplishments of the federal government over the past few years The whole "my side is better than their side" game is so tired I too am glad though that the Tea Party is shooting themselves in the foot... they're a fractured + aimless + partially bigoted political movement that's been overtaken by froth-mouthed neo cons[
Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
I am so sick of the two party system. At this point, I would like an additional viable party, whether it is on the left or right.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
CTK I agree with a lot of your sentiment. But I view Democrat control two ways at once. As a progressive I think Obama & Congress are doing a pretty bad job so far. But they're also centrist Democrats, so I fundamentally disagree with them. I do, however, think it's a mistake to equate Dem control with Republican control.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
-
Boygabriel » CTK I agree with a lot of your sentiment. But I view Democrat control two ways at once. As a progressive I think Obama & Congress are doing a pretty bad job so far. But they're also centrist Democrats, so I fundamentally disagree with them. I do, however, think it's a mistake to equate Dem control with Republican control.
My point is, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in... nobody should be excited about elections swinging one way or another[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
The Daily News puts forward its agenda.... Carl Paladino's ill-informed Tea Party rage will spell doom for GOP's credibility in NY http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/09/15/2010-09-15_carl_paladinos_illinformed_tea_party_rage_will_spell_doom_for_gops_credibility_i.htmlFor better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
I am registered as a Republican...but don't like to call myself one. I identify more closely with them so would rather vote that way in the primaries. I refer to myself as a moderate conservative (which I consider progressive but ultra liberals seem to think they are...strange!) Usually both candidates are idiots and this time its the same. I would rather vote for Donald Duck than the 2 idiots we have to choose from.
-
Cool The Kid » [quote="Boygabriel"]CTK I agree with a lot of your sentiment. But I view Democrat control two ways at once. As a progressive I think Obama & Congress are doing a pretty bad job so far. But they're also centrist Democrats, so I fundamentally disagree with them. I do, however, think it's a mistake to equate Dem control with Republican control.
My point is, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in... nobody should be excited about elections swinging one way or another[/quote] huh? this smacks of the nader-ite stupidity of 2000. yes, sometimes both parties to shitty things. but no, that doesn't mean there's no difference, and anyone who says otherwise is intensely puzzling to me. except for the few whose lives are so thoroughly insulated by privilege that it really *doesn't* matter, of course.Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit -
sweet tea » [quote="Cool The Kid"][quote="Boygabriel"]CTK I agree with a lot of your sentiment. But I view Democrat control two ways at once. As a progressive I think Obama & Congress are doing a pretty bad job so far. But they're also centrist Democrats, so I fundamentally disagree with them. I do, however, think it's a mistake to equate Dem control with Republican control.
My point is, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in... nobody should be excited about elections swinging one way or another[/quote] huh? this smacks of the nader-ite stupidity of 2000. yes, sometimes both parties to shitty things. but no, that doesn't mean there's no difference, and anyone who says otherwise is intensely puzzling to me. except for the few whose lives are so thoroughly insulated by privilege that it really *doesn't* matter, of course.[/quote] Both parties have been doing shitty things for the past decade... I alluded to a few of the Dems' greatest hits in an earlier post Maybe if we try to quantify the objective damage done one party would win out over another... but I can say w/confidence that at the federal level neither party has done much for the avg American in a long time... I think it's high time we as Americans stopped looking at politicians through the lens of ideologies and started looking at them through the lenses of actions and results. From that POV I can't see how one could choose one party over the other[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
um, health care? i know the bill was full of compromises, but it wasn't nothing. the lilly ledbetter fair pay act? working women are "average americans." those are two off the top of my head. and i know i was glad to hear last spring, when it looked like i would lose half my job and hence my health care, that there was a subsidized COBRA available. on a personal level, i also like that the dems don't try to drive voter turnout via anti-gay referenda. that may not count as legislation per se, but it matters.Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit
-
Delaware GOP Tea Party v Eddie Izzard makes me smile...
-
sweet tea » um, health care? i know the bill was full of compromises, but it wasn't nothing. the lilly ledbetter fair pay act? working women are "average americans." those are two off the top of my head. and i know i was glad to hear last spring, when it looked like i would lose half my job and hence my health care, that there was a subsidized COBRA available. on a personal level, i also like that the dems don't try to drive voter turnout via anti-gay referenda. that may not count as legislation per se, but it matters.
to this I would add I'm willing to criticize American foreign policy as much as the next person, regardless of which party is in the White House. (Perhaps the most awful thing the United States did in 1990s was actively convince other nations to ignore Rwanda, let alone help Rwanda ourselves in 1994). HOWEVER An Al Gore presidency would have never invaded Iraq. That was strictly a neoconservative Republican obsession dating back decades, led by a group of about 5 people, all ultra neocon (Feith, Rummy, Wolfowitz, etc etc). SO on the one hand, American foreign policy is severly flawed, to use a euphemism, no matter who's in power, on the other hand, it's pretty obvious to me that Republicans are more likely to start wars, increase defense spending and generally create more misery throughout the world. However it should be noted, no president to date has yet killed as many Afghan civilians as 'collateral damage' than Obama has with predator drones in Af/Pak.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
You can't make this shit up. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/us/politics/20odonnell.html?_r=2&hpw
-
You liberals poke fun at its candidates and overlook its appeal, and the Tea Party continues to organize. From the Wall Street Journal: Here are pollsters Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen in the Washington Examiner: "The Tea Party has become one of the most powerful and extraordinary movements in American political history." "It is as popular as both the Democratic and Republican parties." "Over half of the electorate now say they favor the Tea Party movement, around 35 percent say they support the movement, 20 to 25 percent self-identify as members of the movement." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703440604575496221482123504.htmlVery un- "sivilized".
-
whynot_31 » I am so sick of the two party system. At this point, I would like an additional viable party, whether it is on the left or right.
Let's see whether the Tea Party is able to evolve into a actual political party, with leaders and platform. ....so far, it is seems to be mostly people who are angry and looking for causes. Kinda like many 15 year olds. ....the Tea Party has real work ahead of them. Thier causes are so disparate that they kind of remind me of the identity politics period of the Democrats. ....there was a huge period in the Reagan Era when it seemed Democrats just knew they didn't like the status quo, but they were lost in terms of economic and social policy. [some argue this period hasn't ended].For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
krowonhill » You liberals poke fun at its candidates and overlook its appeal, and the Tea Party continues to organize. From the Wall Street Journal: Here are pollsters Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen in the Washington Examiner: "The Tea Party has become one of the most powerful and extraordinary movements in American political history." "It is as popular as both the Democratic and Republican parties." "Over half of the electorate now say they favor the Tea Party movement, around 35 percent say they support the movement, 20 to 25 percent self-identify as members of the movement." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703440604575496221482123504.html
You're making misleading generalizations and weak conclusions. Despite how much fun tea party candidates are to make fun of, few liberals are overlooking the appeal. Obviously they are popular among a certain segment. That segment is white (89%) conservatives who usually vote Republican (66%). Headlines or stats that imply equal support for the Tea Party among liberals and conservatives are misleading to say the least. According to one study, 66% of Tea Party supporters "always" or "usually" vote Republican. Only 5% "always vote democratic" (and 25% vote equal each way). The Tea Party is a primarily white (89%), conservative (66%) movement that is going to help Democrats win a couple seats they would have lost otherwise (Nevada, Delaware, etc).Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
I agree with you that Tea Party supporters are mostly Republican. In fact, the article to which I referred discusses the potential for the Tea Party to usurp the Republican party. I disagree with you though that they are not a viable threat to Democratic candidates. You cite a statistic from CBS News that 66% of Tea Party supporters always or usually vote Republican. That leaves a big chuck (34%) of unaffiliated, Democratic, or otherwise that is voting Tea Party. Besides that, it's clear that Obama won the last presidential election not because he was the most popular candidate but because more people who supported him actually voted. The Tea Party is going to be working their tooshes off to make sure their supporters get out and vote. So, yes, I see the Tea Party as a viable force in our country. In fact, I find the swift rise of the Tea Party very frightening. I think treating them as a joke on a public forum when you could be exposing the fallacies of their economic policies is misguided. I also think that it is a typical liberal response that is the B side to inflammatory conservative poses that I find equally difficult to take.Very un- "sivilized".
-
At times I have tried to bring up various tea party policy beliefs, but strangely no tea party sympathizers are ever willing to actually discuss them. And this post isn't intended to mock them. I'm arguing that in many races they're going to help the Democratic cause, which I indeed find funny. I don't find the rise of the tea party that frightening. Originally they may have been a force for real change, but by now they've been coopted by the Republican establishment and they mostly stand for the same things Republicans have always stood for since Reagan and earlier.
I also think that it is a typical liberal response that is the B side to inflammatory conservative poses that I find equally difficult to take.
This is false equivalency, especially when referring to specific things I write. I don't call anyone Hitler nor do I think we should settle things "by ballot or bullet". Etc etc.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel, You set the tone for this thread by referring to Tea Party candidates as "fools". The posts that followed reflected that sentiment. To me, that kind of labelling is what passes as political discourse from both liberals and conservatives. "Fools" is just a less interesting slur (hence, a "B side") than "Hitler". None of it is argument, although it may appear persuasive if you're on the same side. We will continue to disagree on whether the Tea Party constitutes a viable threat. The verdict is certainly not out yet. You seem to have a lot of interest in the Tea Party and a lot of information about the group. I think you could put your energy to better use than you are currently, but I understand that your motivation level is going to depend on how you perceive their chances. I think the few conservatives here who might be willing to engage you (despite the reflectively liberal slant of this board) are probably put off by posts which describe them up front as "fools."Very un- "sivilized".
-
krowonhill » Boygabriel, You set the tone for this thread by referring to Tea Party candidates as "fools". The posts that followed reflected that sentiment. To me, that kind of labelling is what passes as political discourse from both liberals and conservatives. "Fools" is just a less interesting slur (hence, a "B side") than "Hitler". None of it is argument, although it may appear persuasive if you're on the same side.
The candidates they've been putting up so far are indeed fools, and I'm happy to argue such. Sharron Angle. Carl Paladino. Christine O'Donnell. Soon-to-be Sarah Palin in 2012.krowonhill » I think the few conservatives here who might be willing to engage you (despite the reflectively liberal slant of this board) are probably put off by posts which describe them up front as "fools."
I think you're assuming too much about tea party sympathizers on this site and ignoring the posting pattern of the more vocal of them. They generally aren't interested in discussion of any kind. I've explicitly entreated them for debate, using moderate langauge and tone, and am met with silence. So I make my own posts, giving my own point of view. This post is about how fools like Angle and O'Donnell are going to help the Democratic cause. I look forward to following this topic with anyone here who wants to contribute."Fools" is just a less interesting slur (hence, a "B side") than "Hitler".
Seems like a bit of a stretch, but that's your prerogative.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Subject: Re: Every time a tea party candidate wins a nomination, I sm
Boygabriel » Next time there are Republican primaries, I'm considering donating money to these fools. Some are going to win their general elections, but many are going to give a position in office to a Democrat who would have otherwise lost (coughcoughHarryReid). It's my Sarah Palin strategy. I hope to Jah that she wins the Repub nomination in 2012.
Reid will be toast as well as his offspring who is getting his bucked kicked by Sandoval. -
krowonhill » You liberals poke fun at its candidates and overlook its appeal, and the Tea Party continues to organize. From the Wall Street Journal: Here are pollsters Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen in the Washington Examiner: "The Tea Party has become one of the most powerful and extraordinary movements in American political history." "It is as popular as both the Democratic and Republican parties." "Over half of the electorate now say they favor the Tea Party movement, around 35 percent say they support the movement, 20 to 25 percent self-identify as members of the movement." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703440604575496221482123504.html
Don't confuse them with facts. Conservatives are tired of rinos and the America apologists in the White House. Americans in general are tired of no jobs and government bailouts and huge union pensions. Blame President Bill Clinton and Vice President Gore for the Rwandan atrocities. Hopefully Vice President Gore is floating on an ice cap with a masseuse never to be heard from again. -
Believe it or not, I agree with the original ideals of the Tea Party. Those ideals have now been lost (or buried by the media, whichever you prefer): Trade Deficit reductions. Reduction in Federal Spending. ....but I have yet to see anyone talk about what I feel would be needed to achieve these goals. I see both the problem and the solution differently than many people: American wages are way too high to complete in the world marketplace. So far, I've only heard folks complain about illegal immigrants because they depress their wages. While I agree that illegal immigrants bring wages down, I believe that many employers would simply cease to exist if US citizens were given the ability to dictate how much citizens should be paid. Citizens are unwillingly to take pay cuts to make the nation competitive, so immigrants have arrived (via legal as well as illegal means) to underbid them in the marketplace. Our Federal debt and trade deficits have given us the belief that we deserve the standard of living that we are accustomed to. If we are going to become a nation that is not dependent upon federal income redistribution plans, we are going to have to produce a good or service that the world demands. I've been disappointed that the stimulus $ has not invested more in infrastructure. ....let's pick some worldwide industries and dominate them. ....for a change, let's be the nation that gets dragged in front of the World Trade Organization for dumping OUR goods and services on some other nation. I'm all for creating a populace that believes it is responsible for having a set of skills that makes it employable, and that the government is not responsible for creating make-work jobs that will get us no where in the long run. How's this for an election platform? "with me as your representative, your standard of living will fall and you will not pass on debt to the next generation. You will make the sacrifices that are required to make this country competitve again" [....damn, only I voted for me.]For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
A scathing rebuttal to Tea Party ideas, whynot ... that's what I'm talking about.Very un- "sivilized".
-
The left is slowly beginning to take notice of the tea party. For example, this group is claiming to understand the anger, but it isn't clear what they are proposing as an alternative: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/22/calif-group-airs-anti-tea-party-ad-in-times-square/ Their tactic of calling the opposition "insane" also doesn't earn a lot of points with those who think. ....sadly, I predict that no one will follow the unpopular platform of my candidacy, and most will continue to fight for as much of the handouts as they can carry .....handouts that they hope everyone but them will somehow magically pay for. American seems to have forgotten that nothing is free. There are loans in which you pay only the interest, but the principal is due at some later date. We have deluded ourselves into believing that not only will we never have to repay the principal, but also that someone else will pay the interest. Those who don't take the handouts know that they will still have to pay for them, so their ideological opposition is costly with voters who believe this has become an "every person for themselves, screw the future because I won't be alive then" strategy. America is a ponzi scheme.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
Tea Party Policy criticism:
September 23, 2010 07:00 AM In New Republican Tea Party Contract For America, Koch Industries and Bechtel Considered "Small Business" By karoli (h/t Heather) You can't make this stuff up. Republicans are trying to pass off Koch Industries and Bechtel as "small business", deserving of a 20% tax deduction on their total income. I'm still reading their 21-page monstrosity, but this one jumped out at me. Here's how it works: Some companies are umbrella companies with many subsidiaries. The parent is generally a "pass-through entity." Typically they are identifiable as LLCs or Limited Partnerships, where the income passes through to the owners. It's often used because the pass-through avoids the possibility of excess profits becoming dividends, taxed at a higher rate. These entities don't pay corporate taxes, but their owners do pay personal income taxes on the profits passed through. So now let's look at the Republican plan for "small business". [quote] Page 8: Give Small Businesses a Tax Deduction: We will allow small business owners to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their business income. This will provide entrepreneurs with a much-needed infusion of capital for infusion and new hiring.
So, here's how that works: Koch Industries, Inc. makes a zillion bucks, passed through to the Koch Brothers as owners, they pay tax on a zillion bucks. Under the GOP plan, they'll make a zillion bucks, deduct 20% of it as a corporate deduction, leaving a passthrough of 80% of a zillion to pay personal taxes on. See how that works? A double dip! A freebie tax deduction and then 20% less taxable income to the owners. There's some fiscal responsibility for ya. Giving the Kochs an extra piece of their zillion to fund more astroturf, more voter suppression, more tea party nonsense. Please, someone tell me how they keep getting away with this.[/quote]Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
pitu » Delaware GOP Tea Party v Eddie Izzard makes me smile...
As if I could love Eddie Izzard any more! Here's a good one, especially because she's debating with a Real World MTV reality TV guy LOL!(\__/)
(=’.'=)
(”)_(”) -
evolution is a myth http://gothamist.com/2010/09/25/christine_odonnell_evolution_is_a_m.phpFor better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
Your 2010 Tea Party candidates, ladies and gentlemen.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
-
Boygabriel » Your 2010 Tea Party candidates, ladies and gentlemen.
Uh, how long ago was that? The esteemed President thinks there are 57 states course he really meant 57 islamic states, he thinks the people of Austria speak Austrian, or one of his many confusions without his trusted teleprompter breathalyzer/inhalator. The list goes on and on with his vast ignorance. Course we've never seen his college transcripts and never will. Carry on with you maher got ya decades old videos. It's quite sad though. -
whynot_31 » I am so sick of the two party system. At this point, I would like an additional viable party, whether it is on the left or right.
I fear I will have to continue to wait.....For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/26/alan-grayson-dan-webster-ad-abortion_n_739643.html The extremist freaks that the tea baggers have forced on the Republicans are going to cost them some seats they might have won with other candidates.
-
Harry Reid loves the Tea Party.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
-
Carnivore » http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/26/alan-grayson-dan-webster-ad-abortion_n_739643.html The extremist freaks that the tea baggers have forced on the Republicans are going to cost them some seats they might have won with other candidates.
Geez, I hope all your patients are liberals with that talk. Angry much. This country was founded on Christian principals whether you like it or not. By the way, Alan Grayson is a fucking nut job. Fits in with the liberal party though. Can't wait till November.
-
Carnivore » http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/26/alan-grayson-dan-webster-ad-abortion_n_739643.html The extremist freaks that the tea baggers have forced on the Republicans are going to cost them some seats they might have won with other candidates.
This politician's stated view is hardly extremist. 45% of Americans believe that abortion should be illegal in all or most cases (Pew Research, 2009). If you believe that life begins at conception, it makes logical sense for *all* abortions to be illegal. It's not a view we usually hear from politicians only because so many Republican candidates modify their views in order to pull in fiscal conservatives/social moderates. However, this blog entry (and the poster's reference to it) exhibits exactly the kind of hyperbolic outcry against the "other" side that I'm talking about. The article is only effective if the audience is already anti-abortion and also ignorant of how many Americans support abortion rights. There's a whole country out there, and a lot of it is voting Tea Party, folks.Very un- "sivilized". -
krowonhill » If you believe that life begins at conception, it makes logical sense for *all* abortions to be illegal.
not if you believe in pre-eclampsia, it doesn't.Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit -
Krow- I think you are under estimating the country's voters if you believe they will vote for a candidate based on blind anger alone. For example, they'd never elect a former wrestler like Jesse Ventura to be governor, the former Terminator Arnorld, or re-elect Marion Barry to be Mayor (sarcasm). If we ever had a common ethos, I think evaporated sometime around --I don't know-- 1962? It has been an interesting 50 years of making kids state the pledge of allegiance, and it might take another few years for the States Rights (aka Tea Party) folks to cement the right for localities to have different laws regarding abortion, gay marriage, health care, and immigration. With that "freedom", will come the independence from federal rule they have long sought. Yes, the myth of a shared ethos has been fun, but not nearly as much fun as spending all of that free federal money (i.e. debt). That has been among the best, and longest highs ever. ....but, as Malthus and I agree: Over the next 20 years, we'll need to compete with the rest of the world as we never have. ....we'll also need to somehow pay back our present debts. Although our delusion isn't sustainable, folks are going to need some better candidates before they break from this tired two party system and vote for the as of yet mythical Tea "Party" en mass. After all, they are electing mostly local politicians in this go around. Although they preceded this present variety of "Tea Party" anger, even Jesse, Arnold and Marion had a certain appeal that the present candidates seem to lack. But, yes, it is foolish for anyone to simply write off the Tea Party. One of its biggest strengths, is that the mere idea of it scares people who like to be scared. These folks can get organized in this country, and may be the same folks bought iodine tablets out of the false belief that they would ward off a dirty bomb, and worried about Aliens invading on Y2K? Who am I to take a good scare from them? Who am I to say that, so far, all we have to offer them is disorganized bunches of angry people, who feel their birthright is disappearing? But there is hope! In the event that the Tea Party ever becomes a singular entity, it will hold great appeal to people who fear a changed nation and world. Should folks ever break their addiction to federal $, the Tea Party will hold out the promise that with independence, the power of the evil feds will shrink! ..and, in what will seem like no time, no one outside their state will really care what happens there. So far, their dreams seem to include living in a state that is able to freely deny: Gay folks the right to marry Women the right to an abortion in order to protect God's precious little unborn "souls" Immigrants any rights what so ever ....and, best of all, establish Christianity to be the official religion! Yes, eventually we won't be enough of a nation to care what happens "over there". [Some of us already don't] P.S. Shhhhhh, don't tell them that a 1961 version of the US and world isn't going to happen again. PPS. Yup, they are right. The US will never be a "socialist" country. ...it will break up long before we ever get close to centralize system of command and control. Don't worry, it will be a while before it happens, but I wish them luck! [If we are the ones who break away from them, I wish us luck!] Much requested Cliff Notes version of this post: Our present two parties aren't cutting it. But, even given the present voter dissatisfaction, I don't see the Tea Party as being together enough to pull off and create a viable third. ...Maybe next election! Or, maybe the one after that! .....As usual, some will fret and others will adapt. Some will even say, "so what? Let 'em rule themselves. They aren't me."For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
Ah, the debate over the US's Christian history ....as if we are bound to always be what we once were (or weren't)....
Carnivore » Wrong again, eggcream. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/the-myth-of-a-christian-n_n_720195.html
Eggcream, here's some notes for your next round: http://thebrooklynink.com/2010/09/26/14725-brooklyn-tea-party-protests-mosques-big-government-at-rally-2/ I'm rooting for a battle, if not a winner.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
fun chart for tea party supporters:
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Carnivore » Wrong again, eggcream. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/the-myth-of-a-christian-n_n_720195.html
too funny. -
[quote="Boygabriel"]fun chart for tea party supporters:
"The Washington Monthly is a monthly nonprofit magazine of United States politics and government that is based in Washington, D.C.
The magazine's founder is Charles Peters, who started the magazine in 1969 and continues to write monthly columns. Paul Glastris, former speechwriter for Bill Clinton, has been the Monthly's editor-in-chief since 2001. Author and journalist Markos Kounalakis is the magazine's president emeritus. Diane Straus Tucker is the magazine's current publisher. Past staff editors of the magazine include Taylor Branch, James Fallows, David Ignatius, Nicholas Lemann, Mickey Kaus, Jonathan Alter, Joshua Green and Jon Meacham.
The politics of the Monthly are left of center"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Monthly
-
Contrary to Republican concepts of political discourse, "it's liberal!" doesn't actually refute anything. It's another version of ad hominem. I can explain further if you'd like.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
-
Boygabriel » Contrary to Republican concepts of political discourse, "it's liberal!" doesn't actually refute anything. It's another version of ad hominem. I can explain further if you'd like.
Seeing as how they lie it does. Sort of like liberals rallying cry of Fox er Faux News including the esteemed President Barack Obama's whining of Fox news the other day. Only difference Fox is successful. -
you guys are fighting who has better media: the left or the right. Even I will stay out of that silly debate. ....preach to the choir.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
eggcream » [quote="Boygabriel"]Contrary to Republican concepts of political discourse, "it's liberal!" doesn't actually refute anything. It's another version of ad hominem. I can explain further if you'd like.
Seeing as how they lie it does. Sort of like liberals rallying cry of Fox er Faux News including barry's whining of Fox news the other day. Only difference Fox is successful.[/quote] The difference of course being that YOU'RE using mindless ad hominem attacks that say, "that's librul!!!" and don't refute the point, and I am not doing the same to what you post.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
whynot_31 » you guys are fighting who has better media: the left or the right. Even I will stay out of that silly debate. ....preach to the choir.
I am not. I don't condemn arguments strictly b/c of their media source. Do not equate us.Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel » [quote="whynot_31"]you guys are fighting who has better media: the left or the right. Even I will stay out of that silly debate. ....preach to the choir.
I am not. I don't condemn arguments strictly b/c of their media source. Do not equate us.[/quote] So noted. These folks write pretty well, and are even discussing the Tea Party. ....they are trying to bring them into the fold of the Republican party. http://www.heritage.org/Events/2010/09/Mad-As-Hell they publish other stuff too: http://www.heritage.org/ ....these other folks have pretty good educations as well... http://www.aei.org/home http://www.aei.org/pressFor better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Here is my internet article de jour: "Weary Working Women' May Be Key To Midterms" (NPR) In some cases, weary working women may be lured by the Tea Party message that government is not their friend but their enemy. They may be drawn to the "mama grizzly" imagery of Sarah Palin and other conservative firebrands reaching out to them. But they need not actually defect to damage the Democrats' hopes. All they need to do is stay home. http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/09/28/130186841/-weary-working-women-may-be-the-key-to-2010-election-results As you can see, it supports my point that the potential of the Tea Party to change American politics is greater than generally seems to be acknowledged on this board.Very un- "sivilized".
Welcome! Please log in to post, or register a new account!