So Newt pulling ahead means the Tea Party nonsense is over?

Earth. The alternative presented isn't what you are projecting and you know it.
What in blue blazes are you talking about?

Paul isn't for living within our means, his pork shows that. What his 'principles' are for are stuck in the 19th Century, favoring white rule. That's not progress.
Dr. Paul is only playing the game that he's given, in order to get the tax money paid by his constituents back into his district...I have yet to hear anyone propose a better way for him to do so.

I have no idea how you perceive that his principles favor white rule or what skin color even has to do with any of this.
 
Last edited:
What in blue blazes are you talking about?

Paul isn't for living within our means, his pork shows that. What his 'principles' are for are stuck in the 19th Century, favoring white rule. That's not progress.
Dr. Paul is only playing the game that he's given, in order to get the tax money paid by his constituents back into his district...I have yet to hear anyone propose a better way for him to do so.

I have no idea how you perceive that his principles favor white rule or what skin color even has to do with any of this.

it appears to me that bringing race into the issue, when speaking of paul, allows the conversation to change. that way, the R's and D's keep getting elected and keep taking us deeper in debt. i assume that when the next fiscally responsible politicians comes around, similar tactics will be used on them to deep the R's and D's rolling.
 
What in blue blazes are you talking about?

Paul isn't for living within our means, his pork shows that. What his 'principles' are for are stuck in the 19th Century, favoring white rule. That's not progress.
Dr. Paul is only playing the game that he's given, in order to get the tax money paid by his constituents back into his district...I have yet to hear anyone propose a better way for him to do so.

I have no idea how you perceive that his principles favor white rule or what skin color even has to do with any of this.

it appears to me that bringing race into the issue, when speaking of paul, allows the conversation to change. that way, the R's and D's keep getting elected and keep taking us deeper in debt. i assume that when the next fiscally responsible politicians comes around, similar tactics will be used on them to keep the R's and D's rolling.
 
Paul isn't for living within our means, his pork shows that. What his 'principles' are for are stuck in the 19th Century, favoring white rule. That's not progress.
Dr. Paul is only playing the game that he's given, in order to get the tax money paid by his constituents back into his district...I have yet to hear anyone propose a better way for him to do so.

I have no idea how you perceive that his principles favor white rule or what skin color even has to do with any of this.

it appears to me that bringing race into the issue, when speaking of paul, allows the conversation to change. that way, the R's and D's keep getting elected and keep taking us deeper in debt. i assume that when the next fiscally responsible politicians comes around, similar tactics will be used on them to keep the R's and D's rolling.

Except that Annie doesn't play that BS.

She's misunderstanding something and I can't blame her...Dr. Paul isn't a very good communicator to people who don't already understand what he is saying.
 
Kinda looks that way to me.
Or is Leroy now the Tea Party darling?

What would have happened if the "TEA Party nonsense" wasn't over?
OWS on a much larger scale... Thing is? One side is concerned of the direction of the country, the other is demanding more handouts at the others' expense...not hard to differentiate the two...the left is extremely confused.
 
Maybe. Newt will get into bed with anyone, any group who can benefit him in any way though.
 
Kinda looks that way to me.
Or is Leroy now the Tea Party darling?

What would have happened if the "TEA Party nonsense" wasn't over?
OWS on a much larger scale... Thing is? One side is concerned of the direction of the country, the other is demanding more handouts at the others' expense...not hard to differentiate the two...the left is extremely confused.

do you consider giving money to companies to prevent them from going out of business to be handouts? if not, then what do you consider giving tax payer's money to them to be?
 
it appears to me that bringing race into the issue, when speaking of paul, allows the conversation to change. that way, the R's and D's keep getting elected and keep taking us deeper in debt. i assume that when the next fiscally responsible politicians comes around, similar tactics will be used on them to deep the R's and D's rolling.

Paul may or may not be ‘fiscally responsible,’ but it’s of no matter because he’s Constitutionally irresponsible, in that he’s ignorant of the Constitution and its case law, or in contempt of the same. Consequently Paul’s unqualified to be president, having nothing to do with the issue of race.
 
it appears to me that bringing race into the issue, when speaking of paul, allows the conversation to change. that way, the R's and D's keep getting elected and keep taking us deeper in debt. i assume that when the next fiscally responsible politicians comes around, similar tactics will be used on them to deep the R's and D's rolling.

Paul may or may not be ‘fiscally responsible,’ but it’s of no matter because he’s Constitutionally irresponsible, in that he’s ignorant of the Constitution and its case law, or in contempt of the same.

are you qualified to make that judgement? if so, how?
 
it appears to me that bringing race into the issue, when speaking of paul, allows the conversation to change. that way, the R's and D's keep getting elected and keep taking us deeper in debt. i assume that when the next fiscally responsible politicians comes around, similar tactics will be used on them to deep the R's and D's rolling.

Paul may or may not be ‘fiscally responsible,’ but it’s of no matter because he’s Constitutionally irresponsible, in that he’s ignorant of the Constitution and its case law, or in contempt of the same. Consequently Paul’s unqualified to be president, having nothing to do with the issue of race.
Funny, I see the words "case law" nowhere in the document.

Seems the ignorance is all yours, Bubba.
 
What would have happened if the "TEA Party nonsense" wasn't over?
OWS on a much larger scale... Thing is? One side is concerned of the direction of the country, the other is demanding more handouts at the others' expense...not hard to differentiate the two...the left is extremely confused.

do you consider giving money to companies to prevent them from going out of business to be handouts? if not, then what do you consider giving tax payer's money to them to be?

Like Obama selectively handing out stimulus money to corporate "friends" and "bundlers"?
 
If Newt is supported by the Tea Party as some are claiming, then The Tea Party and Pelosi agree on things. Perhaps the tea party has more in common with liberals than we previously thought.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154]Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change - YouTube[/ame]
 
Kinda looks that way to me.
Or is Leroy now the Tea Party darling?

Actually, the TPM is lining up behind him, yes.

I think the thing is, the TPM is not a monolithic group. It's a lot of members with a lot of different complaints. I also think that it is unrealistic to expect that they are going to change a 160 year old political party in 3 years.

Well yeah but they claimed Reagan would fix everything, then it was Bush II who would fix everything. Then it was the regained repub majority in the house and several TP types elected to congress that were going to fix everything.

At what point does optimisism become stupidity?

And no I do not think the dems are going to fix everything.
I think BOTH party's suck bigtime and are mostly controlled by the "market" not the people.
 
Kinda looks that way to me.
Or is Leroy now the Tea Party darling?

Actually, the TPM is lining up behind him, yes.

I think the thing is, the TPM is not a monolithic group. It's a lot of members with a lot of different complaints. I also think that it is unrealistic to expect that they are going to change a 160 year old political party in 3 years.

Well yeah but they claimed Reagan would fix everything, then it was Bush II who would fix everything. Then it was the regained repub majority in the house and several TP types elected to congress that were going to fix everything.

At what point does optimisism become stupidity?

And no I do not think the dems are going to fix everything.
I think BOTH party's suck bigtime and are mostly controlled by the "market" not the people.

Obama claimed the planet would heal and the seas would recede. Anything Newt is promising seems a bit tame compared to that.

I do think that we have a lot of hard choices ahead, without a doubt. And we aren't ready to make them yet, and the politicians of both parties aren't levelling with us.
 
OWS on a much larger scale... Thing is? One side is concerned of the direction of the country, the other is demanding more handouts at the others' expense...not hard to differentiate the two...the left is extremely confused.

do you consider giving money to companies to prevent them from going out of business to be handouts? if not, then what do you consider giving tax payer's money to them to be?

Like Obama selectively handing out stimulus money to corporate "friends" and "bundlers"?

exactly.

but why did you leave out the republicans and who they gave/give money to??
 

Forum List

Back
Top