My response was definitely bigotry. I was fighting fire with fire. Guess that blew up in both our faces.
d'oh! I don't know about you, but I'm tired of this discussion. Can you believe it's still 26 days till training camp opens!? Damn that's too far away.
Naw you're good. We are all offseasoning pretty hard right now. It would be much easier for us if dame was playing in the World Cup. Edit: wtf, just saw Julius said 26 days until camp....
Speaking of irony.... Ass clown. Just sayin'. (Only kidding - I did not watch, nor do I care to. Just wanted to say you're an...)
But political correctness is crippling honest discourse. Sometimes, you have to offend the sensibilities of others to get them to face their own shortcomings. Yet, we're so concerned about offending others, we can't bring ourselves to address the elephant in the room.
As long as they refuse to confront evil in their own religion, they are not. President Bush had it right when he said, "You're either with us or against us". If you don't like what is being done in the name of your religion, then stand up against it. For too long, too many Christians tolerated the Ku Klux Klan's actions done in the name of Christ. Eventually, good Christians stood up and marginalized them. Muslims have to confront the evil that is being done in the name of Mohammed and Allah. Only when enough of them do so, will that "peaceful majority" be relevant. What concerns me is that I don't think the majority of Muslims across North Africa and the Middle East disagree with either the goals or methods of the jihadists.
As someone who identifies with the Tea Party, you comments are offensive and ignorant. And yes, I call them offensive, because you're the one who insists on being politically correct. Yet somehow, I'm going to guess that your insistence on cultural sensitivity doesn't apply to me or my ilk. We people who champion limited government and an adherence to the liberties enshrined in our Constitution are "fucking it up for the rest of them"? The GOP has gone native. I've lived inside the Beltway. I get that distortion. The Democrats have thrown their lot in with the far left. That's fine. Vaya con Dios. All the moderate Democrats have been wiped out from 2002 onward. However, the GOP lost its way. They were supposed to be the party of limited government, yet gave us Medicare Part D, which was nothing more than a wealth transfer to the elderly from the young. They continued to expand government, and they gave us the Department of Homeland Security. We are being represented by one party in DC today: The go-along, get-along establishment. If I were a Democrat, I'd be cool with that, because things are trending my way, it's just a matter of whether I'm in fifth gear (Democrat majority) or third gear (Republican majority). And did it ever occur to you that those of us who wish to repeal Obamacare, wish to stop executive overreach, highlight the bad parts of the ACA, investigate the NSA, the IRS and Benghazi do so out of a desire to see our country not corrupted by the ruling class? We want a better country, too. However, all the things you listed cover up massive governmental misdeeds (IRS, NSA, Benghazi) and payoffs to powerful insiders (Obamacare). As for the birther crowd, the White House has been smart about it. They saw that they could highlight those folks as crazies, so they have stonewalled the release of the information for so long as to rile up their supporters. Someone who cared about their country would have refused the political advantage, and instead been open immediately. And a curious press wouldn't have been so compliant in making excuses for a Republican president as they have been for this one. I guess you and I have a different definition as to what "level-headed" is. I think supporting a health insurance bill that makes health care more bureaucratic and more expensive, and limits individual choice is not level-headed. I think using the IRS as a tool to punish your political enemies is not level-headed. I think allowing blanket surveillance of average citizens is not level-headed. I think supporting structural deficits in the trillion dollar range is not level headed. I think letting the world burn and bringing conflict to our doorstep instead of nipping it in the bud because you're tired of footing the bill for Pax Americana is not level-headed. But I get it, we disagree.
Hilarious. Thank you for putting a spotlight once again on your own ignorance. It appears to be as wide as it is deep. First, who the hell cares if Republicans lose their jobs? Since when is a political party more important than principles? The Tea Party isn't a wing of the GOP. The Tea Party is it's own structure up for grabs. Obviously, they're going to have sympathies for the side that at least pays lip service to not wildly expanding government. However, they're also going to hold their feet to the fire when their actions aren't consistent with their rhetoric. Second, the Tea Party did not run any candidates for President. We are not a national party with a platform. We are a loose confederation of local organizations who follow a general set of principles. There are people like Matt Kibbe and Jenny Beth Martin who would claim to speak for us, but they hold no more authority than does Al Sharpton speaking for all black people. Third, our country's credit rating was downgraded not because of a government shutdown, but because we have put ourselves in so much debt that it's obvious we can not pay it back without either defaulting or inflating our currency. Fourth, who exactly is sending out "crazy" chain e-mails meant to scare people? It's been the DNC that has raised money off of the false idea that President Obama will be impeached, that the Koch Brothers are taking over our government, that the Tea Party wants to starve children and kill seniors (remember the Paul Ryan look-alike throwing granny off a cliff?), etc., etc. Again, the Tea Party is not an organized group. The DNC is, and they use scare tactics more than anyone else. Fifth, the Tea Party certainly does NOT run the Republican party. The establishment has in fact been in open conflict with the Tea Party. Mitch McConnell has said that his goal is to "crush the Tea Party". Many of us hold no allegiance to any party. I know I won't vote for several GOP candidates in Colorado. Sixth, the Republicans represent their constituency. The country as a whole has moved dramatically leftward. It makes those of us who have stayed in place look like we've lurched rightward. However, what I believed 15 years ago, I believe today. Deficits are bad. Government is too big. A strong America is a force for good and is necessary for a peaceful world. Live within our means. Adhere to the Constitution. Respect the Bill of Rights as a series of negative rights (i.e., what the government cannot do to you). Of course, in a world where the Democrats nominate the Senator with the most liberal voting record and pretend that he's a moderate with "common-sense" solutions just because he has the right skin color, I'm on the side that looks crazy. Gotcha.
Maxie's on a roll today. I'd rep you, but I have to spread some around before I can do so. I'm registered Independent and agree with most of the Tea Party ideas on fiscal issues. I get heartburn when social issues get tossed into the mix, but I'm not sure that's a Tea Party issue as much as it is a right-wing Republican issue. If the Republicans want to regain the White House, they need to find a candidate who can sell the economic issues in a way that comes across as being good for working people as well as the upper 2%.
Damn Maxie...two of the best posts I have read here. And as stated above, I have to spread some around as well....what baffles the hell out of me is how blind those who believe they are enlightened are
Dang Son! You are rather rude for boy that doesn't even understand what bettering the country is. Repealing Obamacare is bettering the country. Every citizen including you should be utterly appalled by ineptitude of this Commander in Chief. Benghazi is not over and I doubt it will be the last example of ineptitude he leaves as his legacy, moving the bar ever lower for the American Presidency.
Brigitte made one error. The one billion "peaceful Muslim" are not irrelevant, they provide the culture of Islam that spawn the Radicals Jihadist and the pool of ready young men. The organisation that have declared war on the United State are the organizations the sons of the peaceful join to be part of a cause. This makes them far from irrelevant, but I like her sprite.
Maxiep, repped for a very thoughtful couple of posts. I disagree on so much of the generalized tea party ideas, but I also agree on much of it. Almost every single social ideal they often stand for, I oppose. But on the rest of the issues, particularly the the ones wanting to get greed and corruption out of our political process, I agree with. I'm tired of the powerful few rigging the system in their favor. And then we both agree with the overreach into our private lives. NSA and all the entire system being built to learn, guide and manipulate our citizens is disgusting. Then there are a bunch of issues we somewhat agree on, like reducing govt size. I want most of the cuts to come from the military, and a peppering on the rest. Neither of us happy with obamacare, but for me it's that it doesn't go nearly far enough. Then, aside from the social issues, there are a few big differences we have. I want lots of oversight, protocol and policies regarding most large businesses. I love the EPA. I am in big favor of consumer protection and making sure products or companies are safe and mindful of our people and environment. And I want zero, nada, no religion in govt and would like to lean towards total separation on any close calls. (This next section contains some assumptions that we agree on certain issues. If I'm wrong on one or all, just let me know.) I hope one day both our sides can come together, put all social issues to the side, and try to fix the actual gears of government, get corruption and quid pro quo deals locked out by 1) getting rid of all party affiliation laws. If someone isn't a D or an R, they should still get equal access to funds and press. 2) constitutional amendment saying only actual people can have the rights of people. (A corp is not a person) 3) put some sort of limits on political donation size or perhaps a limit on total a candidate can raise. 4) make sure there is more oversight and transparency of government. Halt these invasive programs the govt has been ramping up over the past couple decades. Then, once these issues are dealt with we can debate the more polarizing issues.
