Who called TEA Party people the fringe? Whoops

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

lieberman and miller were NEVER representative of the majority of democrats.

Zell Miller was quite representative of southern Democrats. Certainly not of yankee or west coast Dems, but he was pretty much in line with your average southern Democrat around these parts.

As for Lieberman, he was the Democrats' Vice Presidential candidate in 2000. How can you say he's not representative of the majority of Democrats? His voting record was practically in lock step with the rest of his party. The only difference was that he was against pulling out of Iraq and he got pushed out of the party over that one single issue.

nixon WAS representative of repubs....

Nixon was before my time, so I can't comment.

 

[jillian]

Maybe....just like Lieberman was kicked out of his party.
Zel Miller said that his party had left him. I guess it happens to all parties.

lieberman and miller were NEVER representative of the majority of democrats.

nixon WAS representative of repubs....

I'm afraid I don't agree with your analogy.

If dems dont like liberman then they are idiots, he is a good senator.

Thing is, you aren't a democrat. And he doesn't represent democrats. He's a neo-con. Dems aren't. He believes in school vouchers... dems don't. On most issues, he's going to go the moderate route, which is fine, but so will any senator coming out of connecticut.

i personally thought he should have lost his chairmanship when he showed up at the republican convention. you just don't do that, regardless of your disagreements with your party.

 

[Ravi]

When you refer to them as "teabaggers" it makes you appear incredibly immature and detracts from your overall point. That's a free piece of advice. You can learn from it or not.

I apologize for offending the delicate sensitivities of the Tea Party Movement. Those Aushwitz death scenes are just the movements way of saying "Howdy Do"

The Nazi death camp posters were far and few between and were perpetrated by a very small minority of people who attended the tea parties, much like the liberals who held up Bush/Hitler signs at anti-war protests. They were a few tactless people who didn't represent the overall movement. You have that kind of element everywhere. I went to an anti war protest about Iraq a few years back there were people there handing out copies of the Communist Manifesto. Would it be fair for me to characterize all anti war Democrats as Communists? Of course not.

The problem being...Democrat politicians don't get involved and speak at protests, but Republican politicians do. Case in point: the last one at the Capital featured many Republican leaders and in fact the poster comparing health care reform to dead Jews was in the audience and not one of the Republicans condemned that behavior at the event.

 

[jillian]

Zell Miller was quite representative of southern Democrats. Certainly not of yankee or west coast Dems, but he was pretty much in line with your average southern Democrat around these parts.

He was representative of southern democrats when the southern democrats were viable in the south. Near as I can tell, most of them are republicans now.

As for Lieberman, he was the Democrats' Vice Presidential candidate in 2000.
How can you say he's not representative of the majority of Democrats? His voting record was practically in lock step with the rest of his party. The only difference was that he was against pulling out of Iraq and he got pushed out of the party over that one single issue.

I was very proud when he was the VP candidate. It was a shame he did a horrible job during the debates. As for the "one single issue". It was a pretty huge issue. Neocons really don't represent the party. And he's pro vouchers... and very conservative on a lot of social issues. But he should never have turned on his party.

I can think of a lot of republicans who got outsted from their party on the war issue... heard anything from Lincoln Chafee lately? Chuck Hagel? The republicans allowed ny 23 to go to a democrat rather than support Dede Scozzafava since she didn't meet their anti-choice litmus test.

This article might interest you even if you don't agree with it.

Wanted: a new centre party for lost Americans | Andrew Sullivan - Times Online

Nixon was before my time, so I can't comment.

I was a child at the time. But it doesn't have to be during your time for you to know that he won re-election in a landslide... that he started the EPA, that he opened China and that he allowed Henry Kissinger unbelievable latitude in shuttle diplomacy and that he ended the Vietnam War (well, after escalating it... but better late than never).

He also appointed Warren Berger and Harry Blackmun to the USSC.

Nixon would be called a RINO today and bounced out of his party.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The problem being...Democrat politicians don't get involved and speak at protests, but Republican politicians do.

I honestly don't know if that is true or not. I do remember when I lived in Pennsylvania in 2004, Joe Hoeffel who was the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate got arrested at an anti-war protest.

Case in point: the last one at the Capital featured many Republican leaders and in fact the poster comparing health care reform to dead Jews was in the audience and not one of the Republicans condemned that behavior at the event.

I don't know what your political leanings are, but if you're a Democrat or on the left side of the aisle, would it have made any realistic difference to you if they did? Most people on the right and the left disapprove of the other side pretty much no matter what they do. If they do something that looks bad they condemn them for it, but if they hadn't done it at all or apologize for doing it afterward it still doesn't change the disapproval they feel towards them. For example, do you remember when Dick Durbin compared Gitmo to a Soviet gulag and conservatives flipped out screaming that he was comparing U.S. soldiers to the Soviets and Nazis? Durbin ended up apologizing for his comments and was even reduced to tears on the Senate floor. Do you think the people screaming about his comments suddenly thought he wasn't such a bad guy after all since he apologized for it?

Every time some radical element of one of the parties does something distasteful the opposition and the partisans run to the media demanding that the party leaders or the politician(s) present disavow it, but do you think the majority of their supporters and opponents really care if they do or not?

 

[Ravi]

Durbin compared Americans to Soviets, not soldiers.

And yes, it would have made a difference if the Republican politicians condemned the idiots in their midst. By not saying anything they give tacit approval.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

He was representative of southern democrats when the southern democrats were viable in the south. Near as I can tell, most of them are republicans now.

The political stripes of the south have definitely changed over the last 30 years, but the south is not as Republican as a lot of people think. Most of the state legislatures down here are still dominated by Democrats.

I was very proud when he was the VP candidate. It was a shame he did a horrible job during the debates. As for the "one single issue". It was a pretty huge issue. Neocons really don't represent the party. And he's pro vouchers... and very conservative on a lot of social issues. But he should never have turned on his party. I can think of a lot of republicans who got outsted from their party for that issue... heard anything from Lincoln Chafee lately? the republicans allowed ny 23 to go to a democrat rather than support Dede Scozzafava since she didn't meet their anti-choice litmus test.

I can't see how you could classify Lieberman as a neo-con. The man is very much on the left side of the aisle. As I said, if you examine his voting record it's not much different than the rest of his former party. He's as much as a neo-con as FDR was.

As far as Chafee and Scozzafava go, both of them were on the far left side of the aisle. Chafee constantly broke with the GOP on a lot of votes and he wasn't thrown aside by the party. He was thrown out by the people of Rhode Island, a very heavily Democratic state, in a very bad year for the Republican Party. The RNC put a lot of money into trying to get him reelected. As for Scozzafava, I discussed her earlier in this thread. The abandonment of her by the party had little to do with abortion. Other than getting a good rating from the NRA, the woman doesn't hold a single Republican position. The Democrat she ran against was to the right of her on several issues, so of course Republicans wouldn't support her. Why would they? If you're a Republican, what is the point of voting for a Republican who will go to Washington and vote with the Democrats on most of the major issues you care about?

You can't accurately compare Lieberman to Chafee and Scozzafava because Chafee and Scozzafava were against their party on the majority of issues while Lieberman was not.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

And yes, it would have made a difference if the Republican politicians condemned the idiots in their midst. By not saying anything they give tacit approval.

So if they had disavowed it would you run out and vote for them in the next election?

 

[Truthmatters]

Lieberman climbed in bed with the neo cons for power , he will be forever tied to them

 

[namvet]

Lieberman climbed in bed with the neo cons for power , he will be forever tied to them

why is it liberals jump the fence ????

 

[Ravi]

And yes, it would have made a difference if the Republican politicians condemned the idiots in their midst. By not saying anything they give tacit approval.

So if they had disavowed it would you run out and vote for them in the next election?

The chances of me voting for someone that gives approval of demonizing one group using dead Jews is zero.

Other than that I tend to vote for the person that I believe is best for the job. Once in a while that is a Republican.

 

[jillian]

And yes, it would have made a difference if the Republican politicians condemned the idiots in their midst. By not saying anything they give tacit approval.

So if they had disavowed it would you run out and vote for them in the next election?

i can't speak for Ravi, but I have never voted for a democratic mayor and i think most of my gubernatorial votes were republican. If the republicans weren't so doctrinaire on social issues, I'd probably vote for a lot of them...

but i know for myself i would never vote for anyone who thinks there are "pro america parts of the country". so yes, things like whether they condemn birthers or people who call democrats sociailists and nazis does matter.

 

[Darkwind]

didn't the last polls say that only 20% of voters identify as republicans?

so what are we talking about 70% of the 20%?

Whereas 40% identify themselves as conservative while only 23% consider themselves liberal.

Those who attended the tea parties were pretty much split between the parties. I understand why those here and on other political boards want to ignore that little tidbit, it is to Me a good sign.

Since the Independents are now flocking away from the Democrats in droves, 2010 is going to be a rather large pill for the Democrats to swallow.

 

[Truthmatters]

in your dreams.

The teabaggers cling to lies like Obama is a Muslim who was born in Kenya, That global warming is a fake and that Bush was a great president.

You wont win ANY new converts to the R party embracing that stupidity, its why the Independants moved from the R party in the first place.

 

[Meister]

in your dreams.

The teabaggers cling to lies like Obama is a Muslim who was born in Kenya, That global warming is a fake and that Bush was a great president.

You wont win ANY new converts to the R party embracing that stupidity, its why the Independants moved from the R party in the first place.

I highlighted all your projections you dipshit. You don't know what the fuck your talking about, and you prove it in nearly every post you have. Other than that...your A OK in my book.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

didn't the last polls say that only 20% of voters identify as republicans?

so what are we talking about 70% of the 20%?

Whereas 40% identify themselves as conservative while only 23% consider themselves liberal.

Those who attended the tea parties were pretty much split between the parties. I understand why those here and on other political boards want to ignore that little tidbit, it is to Me a good sign.

Since the Independents are now flocking away from the Democrats in droves, 2010 is going to be a rather large pill for the Democrats to swallow.

I believe you are right, we shall see in november.

Everyone is flocking away from the republicans....both conservatives and independants while the independants are also flocking away from the dems.

We could potentially end up with a 3rd party that is larger than the dems and whatever might be left of the republicans.

Still 15% polling points away from that scenerio but if the 22% undecided flipped to 3rd party/tea party type of people we will be the majority.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The chances of me voting for someone that gives approval of demonizing one group using dead Jews is zero.

But that wasn't what I asked. I said if the Republican politicians present did come out and disavow it would it make you go out and now vote for them.

 

[Polk]

So the "Tea Party" is just going to replace the GOP in the coming years maybe. What a surprise.

Same shit, different label slapped on the can.

 

[Polk]

anti-intellectual, angry, government hating....and the rabid religious right.

And if you're not one of them, you're not a real American. Is that who is the average person in these tea parties?

From what I saw of the Atlanta one back in April, yes.

It was really funny for hear them bitch about how the trains were slow and behind schedule.

 

[Polk]

Maybe....just like Lieberman was kicked out of his party.
Zel Miller said that his party had left him. I guess it happens to all parties.

Lieberman wasn't kicked out. He lost a primary.