Liberal super pac goes after teabaggers

[Luddly Neddite]

'Tea Party 10' Targeted In Multimillion Dollar Campaign By Liberal Super PAC


Hopefully, those who voted for these teaparty losers have already seen their mistake. Nothing as foolish as blindly voting against incumbents.

Very funny to see the GObP's own Citizen United used against them.

BTW, we have CREDO for our cell phones and love them. We left AT&T because they support the teaparty and the GObP. When my iPhone quit and Apple said they charge for tech support, we'd finally had enough and dumped them. Now have the Android version of iPhone and have no problems. And, CREDO has competitive pricing, excellent customer service and free tech support.

If you're a progressive liberal, CREDO is perfect.

 

[Lovebears65]

Of course they love the OWS who are breaking laws and burning our american flag..

 

[Luddly Neddite]

burning our american flag

I've noticed you're very anti-Constitution. Why is that?

 

[Katzndogz]

Ahhhh, I see that liberals want people to prove how pro Constitution they are by burning the American Flag!

Let's burn the Rainbow Flag and see how pro Constitution they really are!

 

[California Girl]

Ahhhh, I see that liberals want people to prove how pro Constitution they are by burning the American Flag!

Let's burn the Rainbow Flag and see how pro Constitution they really are!

They'd probably define that as 'hate speech' and throw you in jail.

The OP is a twit.

 

[frazzledgear]

burning our american flag

I've noticed you're very anti-Constitution. Why is that?

Are you under the impression burning the American flag is PRO-Constitution and anyone who speaks out against burning the flag is anti-Constititution? WTF? Talk about a TOTAL lack of critical thinking skills! Just because someone can burn the US flag without fear of prosecution doesn't mean I must approve of them burning it you moron!

With your same logic one could say since you objected to him making a negative comment about flag burning, it must mean YOU are anti-Constitution!

How someone else chooses to exercise their rights NEVER -as in NEVER -places a burden on me to agree with how they chose to exercise it. The Constitution ONLY places a burden on our GOVERNMENT. It NEVER places a burden on ANY individuals to either help, assist, uphold or approve of how someone else chose to exercise their rights. Your exercise of your rights NEVER interferes with the exercise of my own -which means if someone chooses to burn the US flag I can call them an anti-US asshole that they really are. The right to burn a US flag only means GOVERNMENT can't arrest them for it. PERIOD. It sure as hell doesn't mean I have to bite MY tongue, can't exercise MY right of free speech to tell the flag burner what a total asshole I really think he is.

Really should have learned this in that public school you attended -but they stopped doing that not too long after the creation of the Department of Education and public school employees unionized and decided to turn them into political indoctrination centers instead. Do you think you would have picked up on that if they had contributed 93% of their campaign contributions went to Republicans and the Republican Party instead of Democrats? Hmmm? Maybe picked up a whiff of the total stench of blatant corruption THEN?

I wonder about the morons who defend the corruption of our public school system and then pretend there is no correlation to the drop in quality of that education, that it churns out kids who haven't a clue about how their own system is supposed to work, much less understand the value of it -or the drop on the global level in test scores that occurred at the same time. Seriously -would you have been the least bit bothered if Republicans were the beneficiaries of this IDENTICAL massive corruption instead of Democrats and then to add insult to injury it churned out people who are more IGNORANT about their own country and system than ANY previous generation? And not wonder who benefits from that ignorance? The fact the left and Democrats, the beneficiary of this MASSIVE CORRUPTION and money laundering of taxpayer dollars -turns around and DEFENDS it, PROTECTS it and seeks to EXPAND it -is one of many, many, many -MANY- reasons I could never be a liberal. Not ever.

 

[frazzledgear]

burning our american flag

I've noticed you're very anti-Constitution. Why is that?

I noticed one of your signature lines and had to laugh. Telling themselves that "smart" people are liberals and "stupid" people are conservatives must be something you morons need to reassure yourselves about. Does it help you sleep better at night or something? ROFL

But let me ask you, oh "smart" one. Do you really think a British political philosopher from the mid-19th century was actually talking about modern AMERICAN political conservatives and their belief in small government with decentralized powers by his use of the word "conservative"? Seriously? REALLY? Do you really think people who a favor small, decentralized federal government instead of a large, powerful one are STUPID? LOL Do you even understand Mills' own political views? ROFL

Taking quotes entirely out of context and then totally bastardizing them in order to pretend it refers to totally different people on a totally unrelated topic is typical liberalism. I've seen liberals take the James Madison quote "people who value security over liberty deserve neither" and (after first wrongly attributing it to someone like Franklin) -use that quote to defend their PRO GUN CONTROL position and offer it as a counter argument to those who insist the individual has a right to provide for his own security, safety and protection by being armed.

Only problem is James Madison wrote this as a warning to future generations to be on guard against those he said would come arguing that citizens needed to be disarmed on the grounds it increased the public security and safety. Madison was big time supporter of an armed citizenry as the single best means of protecting all our other rights from a government that could more easily turn on its own unarmed citizens. He was warning about the very people who bastardized his own words. So naturally I never expect a liberal to adhere to the context of any quote -not when they think bastardizing it works better.

The fact you think the word "conservative" means the very same thing everywhere in the world tells me all about those "smarts" of yours. ROFL Sorry but Mills wasn't discussing modern US conservatives and their political beliefs WHATSOEVER and it has no bearing on anything of relevance except a very loud statement about your own.........insecurity. But don't let that get in the way of your need to bastardize his quote so you can pretend it means what you NEED it to mean today. Whatever it takes to constantly reassure yourself you are actually the "smart" one here. ROFL

But FYI -the word "conservative" as it is used in ANY country to identify some group of people IN that country, refers to those who adhere strongly to some doctrine or fundamental principles and that deviation from that document or principles should be done only CONSERVATIVELY. But those aren't ever the SAME doctrines or fundamental principles in every country you MORON -but are unique to each country. Which is why an Iranian conservative does NOT equal a British conservative does not equal a Russian conservative does not equal a Chinese conservative does not equal a Venezuelan conservative does not equal an American conservatives. NONE of them are like the others but unique unto themselves because the document or fundamental principles each adheres to and espouses -is totally different in every case. As are the kinds of governments each supports and advocates. You really want to pretend an Iranian conservative has a lot in common with American ones because they too think they should adhere more closely to OUR Constitution? ROFL! Which is why an Iranian conservative actually has far more in common with an American leftwing extremist than any US conservative. Leftwing extremism is totalitarianism just as is the kind of government Iranian conservatives want. The American leftwing extremist and Iranian conservative both already agree on the kind of government they would impose -they just give different reasons for wanting it. It is ALWAYS the kind of government that is advocated that counts MOST when trying to compare different political groups in different countries. Not their justifications or reasons for wanting it. The reasons they give for it matters the least, especially since those justifications are so often deceptive or less than fully disclosed anyway especially for those who seek large, powerful government. US conservatives would reject allowing government to get large enough to even accumulate that kind of power -no matter who intends to wield all that power.

But sure, because I favor a smaller and more decentralized federal government with less power and power more widely disseminated among the people instead of a large, powerful government with far greater control over the individual and therefore believe we need to adhere more closely to a specific document (the US Constitution) in order to get our government more in line with that and therefore means I am a US conservative --actually makes ME the dummy here. Sure honey. But it sure doesn't take much to fool that double digit IQ of yours, does it oh smart one?