Join the Anti-Party Movement! End the Bias!

[Quantum Windbag]

He's typing a response to me stating that the Right has been stupid lately. Let's see if he follows through.

I see no need to repeat things I have said already on this board. Unlike some people, for example, you, I have criticized the Republicans and the Democrats, and am quite proud to say that I have never voted for anyone from either party. I have been labelled as both left and right wing while posting on this board. When that happens to you feel free to come back and discuss being anti party with me.

 

[BobPlumb]

Wouldn't members of the "Anti-Party Movement" be to busy fighting among themselves to accomplish anything because by definition they would be against themselves?

 

[AntiParty]

Why be so hard on yourself? If you don't like the way you argue, change.

UMAD.

Clearly you have been scrambling for a way out of the turd the Right wing has held. I'm enjoying the show

You have been more "progressive" in your last 2 pages than ever in history I would think. Because you can't hold your debate without change. WEIRD how that works.

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

Yea, you spelled it out perfectly. You don't understand my position because we hold different positions.

I am Anti-Party and you are Anti-Government. It's as simple as that. "I want to cut all government spending" is Anti-American. YOU are no Patriot and have no concept of We The People.

You stated, "I want to cut all tax funding including Defense"

You are a weakness to America and care more about your pocket book than the reason your pocket book has so much money in it. THINK ABOUT THAT.

You state that I don't have any facts. I don't post anything but facts and encourage people to prove my facts wrong, so I have facts and not bias nonsense. There is a reason 99.9% of people who respond to me state short insulting statements, because I hold facts, math, statistics, history, EDUCATION.

 

[AntiParty]

He's typing a response to me stating that the Right has been stupid lately. Let's see if he follows through.

I see no need to repeat things I have said already on this board. Unlike some people, for example, you, I have criticized the Republicans and the Democrats, and am quite proud to say that I have never voted for anyone from either party. I have been labelled as both left and right wing while posting on this board. When that happens to you feel free to come back and discuss being anti party with me.

I don't want to insult you because I understand your perspective and I was there once. Except you learned a lot and hated all parties instead of learning the politics of all parties and trying to play the system. WE BOTH HOPE THINGS WILL CHANGE.

You take the stance that all politicians want tyranny and control. I take the stance that all politicans want a pay check and will do what is necessary to get it.

The more you know.

 

[AntiParty]

Wouldn't members of the "Anti-Party Movement" be to busy fighting among themselves to accomplish anything because by definition they would be against themselves?

Again, Anti-Party by my perspective is not against parties. It's against submitting to a party platform.

I believe in single topic, single decision and NO party will persuade my opinion on the topic.

So everyone in an Anti-Party platform debates individual topics instead of embracing a standardized topic base.

Note today's topic movement. Fox News is going to make as many woman based topics as possible because they know Hillary is going to run. Who cares if Hillary is a woman, let's talk Politics, (R)ight?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

UMAD.

Clearly you have been scrambling for a way out of the turd the Right wing has held. I'm enjoying the show

You have been more "progressive" in your last 2 pages than ever in history I would think. Because you can't hold your debate without change. WEIRD how that works.

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

Yea, you spelled it out perfectly. You don't understand my position because we hold different positions.

Your position is that you are always right, and that you have no need to actually defend your position because anyone that disagrees with you is a member of a cult that has a teeny excuse for a brain.

I am Anti-Party and you are Anti-Government. It's as simple as that. "I want to cut all government spending" is Anti-American. YOU are no Patriot and have no concept of We The People.

You are AntiParty just like Obama is a conservative Republican.

You stated, "I want to cut all tax funding including Defense"

I stated no such thing.

I do appreciate the fact that you actually conclusively proved that your position has no basis in reality though.

You are a weakness to America and care more about your pocket book than the reason your pocket book has so much money in it. THINK ABOUT THAT.

I do not own a pocket book.

Think about that.

You state that I don't have any facts. I don't post anything but facts and encourage people to prove my facts wrong, so I have facts and not bias nonsense. There is a reason 99.9% of people who respond to me state short insulting statements, because I hold facts, math, statistics, history, EDUCATION.

You, being the great thinker you are, should have had no problem with the first post I made in this thread, yet you completely ignored it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean...arty-movement-end-the-bias-2.html#post8942073

Feel free to deal with the indisputable evidence that you have no facts, math, science, statistics, education, history, or basic understanding of English grammar.

Or not.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He's typing a response to me stating that the Right has been stupid lately. Let's see if he follows through.

I see no need to repeat things I have said already on this board. Unlike some people, for example, you, I have criticized the Republicans and the Democrats, and am quite proud to say that I have never voted for anyone from either party. I have been labelled as both left and right wing while posting on this board. When that happens to you feel free to come back and discuss being anti party with me.

I don't want to insult you because I understand your perspective and I was there once. Except you learned a lot and hated all parties instead of learning the politics of all parties and trying to play the system. WE BOTH HOPE THINGS WILL CHANGE.

You take the stance that all politicians want tyranny and control. I take the stance that all politicans want a pay check and will do what is necessary to get it.

The more you know.

I don't hate, I gave it up because I prefer self determination. Hating people, or parties, gives them control over me. I am a free man.

If you ever get to the point you think I am at you will be approximately 5000 years in advance of the position you currently hold.

 

[AntiParty]

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

Yea, you spelled it out perfectly. You don't understand my position because we hold different positions.

Your position is that you are always right, and that you have no need to actually defend your position because anyone that disagrees with you is a member of a cult that has a teeny excuse for a brain.



You are AntiParty just like Obama is a conservative Republican.



I stated no such thing.

I do appreciate the fact that you actually conclusively proved that your position has no basis in reality though.

You are a weakness to America and care more about your pocket book than the reason your pocket book has so much money in it. THINK ABOUT THAT.

I do not own a pocket book.

Think about that.

You state that I don't have any facts. I don't post anything but facts and encourage people to prove my facts wrong, so I have facts and not bias nonsense. There is a reason 99.9% of people who respond to me state short insulting statements, because I hold facts, math, statistics, history, EDUCATION.

You, being the great thinker you are, should have had no problem with the first post I made in this thread, yet you completely ignored it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean...arty-movement-end-the-bias-2.html#post8942073

Feel free to deal with the indisputable evidence that you have no facts, math, science, statistics, education, history, or basic understanding of English grammar.

Or not.

I will defend my position on EVERY topic and do. Some think I'm taking sides when I correct flawed statements, like you.

If you think I'm unable to be changed then it's an opinion based topic, like many topics are in politics.

I hold the right to my own opinion. YOU can not dictate my opinion. Your attempt to call me a Leftist if I don't agree with you just makes YOU look bad.

 

[AntiParty]

Why be so hard on yourself? If you don't like the way you argue, change.

UMAD.

Clearly you have been scrambling for a way out of the turd the Right wing has held. I'm enjoying the show

You have been more "progressive" in your last 2 pages than ever in history I would think. Because you can't hold your debate without change. WEIRD how that works.

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

^Anti-Government and Anti-American. THE END.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I will defend my position on EVERY topic and do.

For future reference, saying you will defend your opinion is not actually defending your opinion.

Some think I'm taking sides when I correct flawed statements, like you.

I do not think you take sides when you correct my statements because you have never corrected my statements. All you have done is repeat the same things that I have already proven were wrong and declare yourself the winner of the debate, just like you are now.

If you think I'm unable to be changed then it's an opinion based topic, like many topics are in politics.

It is not an opinion, it is a statement of fact. If you were actually able to change your mind about something you would admit that you were wrong when you make a statement that is provably false.

I hold the right to my own opinion. YOU can not dictate my opinion. Your attempt to call me a Leftist if I don't agree with you just makes YOU look bad.

There you go accusing me of calling you a leftist again. I don't see how me not calling you a leftist simply because I disagree with you reflects badly on me, but I am not a religious zealot so I lack the ability to rationalize that you use to reach that conclusion.

For the record, I am saying you are wrong. That has nothing to do with what side of the aisle you are on, it is simply a matter of being wrong. Your deflection into claiming that I am calling you a leftist has absolutely no bearing on that, and is not something I have actually done. You just reflexively defend yourself by claiming you are not a leftist whenever anyone proves you are wrong about anything.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

UMAD.

Clearly you have been scrambling for a way out of the turd the Right wing has held. I'm enjoying the show

You have been more "progressive" in your last 2 pages than ever in history I would think. Because you can't hold your debate without change. WEIRD how that works.

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

^Anti-Government and Anti-American. THE END.

Because we all know that America was founded on the idea that the government is never wrong.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Not2bSubjugated I dig the reply and appreciate the clarity with which you delineated the strawman and stress on the phrase "in addition."

A unique defense of property: not that it's actually an inherent thing but has descriptively developed through evolutionary means. The contract and legal system we have depends on property. It arranges distribution and the like in legal terms though I think those terms are favoritist and can be traced back to the interests of those setting up the legal framework which is at odd with the majority of human beings on the planet. But as you speak of property allow me to continue: we will continue to evolve and it's entirely likely that property will be subjugated by a mega corporation or conglomerate and it will be opposed to the interests of all the people. Either way, evolution will end property and continue with something else.

Also notice the descriptive fact we adopted private property is not a good argument to adopt the notion.

You also hinted that we will have lowered incentives without property. This is true if humans are taught to pursue wealth forgetting all but self. However, most humans do not live according to this radically anti-human proposition and even those who adhere continue to concern others in their decision making. The one's who don't are clinically diagnosed as pathological and these are the sorts of people who make big bucks on wall street (search on WSJ "lessons of a brain damaged investor").

But if we taught people to adhere to their internal principles of community and social activity, we would naturally develop interchange that is akin to the dialectical process of life that leads to technological advancement. We have been advancing and regressing all the while long before property and profit-maximization were thought up, let alone utilized. Albeit we have seen the most rapid development, this development has not been without cost. Computers were funded for decades before they were turned into private hands. The costs to develop them were funded by the public and once they became marketable we transfered them to Gates and the like. The public reaps the benefits by paying Gates for something they helped create? Odd way of technological advancement. Make people pay more for what they already paid for.

I would keep going as your reply deserves much attention but I must sadly announce I do not have it in me to devote the proper time. Instead I will praise you for your cogent reply and ask what is your educational background for shits and giggles?

I tend to associate your lucidity with a philosophical background but your actual position is usually found among untrained layman or CEOs. I figure you are neither, so why are you defending a position that has no practical value to you and that you must understand as having shortcomings (like water insecurity). I really enjoyed your section on water not existing in certain areas and most people not having access. It was a really eloquent and accurate portrayal that I left out of my reply though I didn't expect you to understand with such precision. Despite our disagreement on this topic, I would like to venture to other areas of interest because you are definitely not to be subjugated (neither am I)!

On your first paragraph, I agree that the initial layout of property distribution anywhere tends to be favorable to the people laying out the terms. That isn't unique to an individual property setup by any means. The problem is with human instinct: where there is enough power to be misused, power will inevitably be misused. The only thing you can count on in terms of a human's driving force is that every single human being seeks to bend as much of his environment as he can to his own values. Integrity and consideration for others are learned values and certainly can't be relied upon, no matter to whom you delegate economic control.

The terms are also favoritist in the sense that they favor those with the greatest overall capacity. The dirty little secret is that any system favors essentially the same people: Those with the most advantageous combination of a high level of natural competence and a low level of moral restriction. Whether the game is judged by money or political sway, the same general crowd will emerge at the apex, and there will -always- be an apex.

As far as mankind "evolving" out of the tendency for desiring individual property, I find that proposition highly laughable. The dual factors of instinctive territoriality and consciousness separated by individual haven't, either of them, changed one iota throughout the recorded history of mankind or any theoretical buildup to that recorded history. Cultural attitudes can't change these factors unless they cause them to be bred out of existence. This is also highly unlikely as atypical psychology isn't a universal point of attractiveness in -any- culture. You know what is? Height. Tall men tend to be viewed as universally attractive. The only natural evolution that's currently effecting mankind, now that we've essentially tamed natural selection as it applies to us, is that we're gradually getting taller, cuz tall guys get laid more than short guys.

Then again, the new technologies and theories regarding augmenting the human brain do point to the probability of eventual communal consciousness by way of electronic telepathy, for lack of a better term. Maybe you're right. Until then, I stand by siding with the basic instinctive premise.

Next up, the lowered incentives without property don't have anything to do with people being taught to value property. Nobody has to be taught to be possessive. On the contrary, eventually every toddler has to be introduced to the concept of sharing.

Regardless of that point, the desire to gather material wealth isn't limited to those with materialistic desires. Anyone who recognizes that money is simply a physical representation of capacity recognizes that money, as opposed to being an end of itself, is a means by which to shape the world around them to their values. Personally, I don't have the need for a lot of physical stuff. I'm kind of a minimalist. I still, however, seek to make literally as much money as I possibly can for any given transaction: The more money I have, the more secure the people I care about are. The more money I have, the more of my values and morals I can afford to promote. Desire for wealth is the same as desire for power, and desire for power is absolutely instinctive.

These inner feelings of community that you talk about, not so much. If community was instinctive, we wouldn't need laws. Unfortunately the "community" that humans adhere to on an instinctive level always equates to the most capable and influential subjugating those less so. We voluntarily form societies because the average individual doesn't want to be subject to the whims of the strong, which is what happens in a legal vacuum. Essentially, what you're proposing is that the most advantageous layout of material distribution is one where we simply teach everyone to eschew one of their most base instincts (individual territoriality) in favor of your morals. Personally, I view this as highly impractical.

Your computer illustration tells me that you and I have vast differences in opinion on who is responsible for what and who therefore owes who for what.

First off, computers were "funded" for years because our government had need for them. They weren't developing them because they thought home PC's would be super fun one day.

Then, "we" didn't transfer shit to Gates and the like, and computers didn't "become" marketable. The guys behind Apple and Microsoft took their knowledge of computer technology and designed products that made the concept of computers marketable to individuals for home, recreational use. If these things just "happened", maybe your argument would make sense. They did not.

Also, the fact that the public paid taxes for the development of computer technology does -not- mean that Bill Gates owes them computers. To the degree that those early computers advanced our governmental and military means, everyone in our society benefitted from that development. Also, everybody paying taxes actually -paid- for the benefit of that advancement, and for their access to said benefit. Presumably, Bill Gates paid for his own access to that benefit and therefore had every bit as much right to it as anybody else. Just because the rest of our society -didn't- turn their knowledge of computers/economics into a highly marketable home product and Bill gates -did- turn his knowledge into that, doesn't mean that Bill Gates owes anybody else the product of -his- contribution to the advancement of said technology. Like it or not, he's the guy that got the wheels moving on Microsoft, and whether or not anybody else theoretically -could- have made the same advancements is irrelevant: they did not. He did. Thus it is he who is selling the product and making the profit, and he God damn well should be. Microsoft has made the world a -far- more efficient place.

In terms of education, I was one of those poster children for wasted potential. High IQ highschool druggy, college dropout. Most of my abstract reasoning exists by virtue of nerdy habits. I read philosophy as a recreational hobby and, ever since I can remember, my version of day-dreaming during menial tasks is arguing abstract concepts in my head. Basically, I live and breathe this shit lol.

Lastly, I disagree with the premise that my philosophy doesn't benefit me. My philosophy demands that each man be allowed to pursue the values of his own conscience. My highest value, from a societal standpoint, is that society not interfere with my self-initiative. I also have zero desire to force anyone else to abide by my morals.

This idea that any ideology that doesn't force everyone to feed each other is contrary to the interests of the majority of mankind is silly, to me. Coddling isn't good for anyone, and all forms of wealth redistribution represent some degree of societally forced coddling of the disadvantaged.

Lastly, a system with less communal control of material favors those with the greatest individual capacity. I have individual capacity in spades. Any system in which I rely primarily on my own abilities to determine the benefit of my actions is a system in which I excel. Period.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You need to broaden your thinking space. Only small minded people with a very limited grasp on reality believe that you are what you post.

It appears that I seriously overestimated your intellect.

You may be a dick on this board but in real life I may think you were cool.

But, you'll never know, because you only see me through the board...

There are points of view I have yet to post on this board so your whole theory is patently false. You simply have not engaged the person enough to determine that from written word. I can call you a dick on this board and you wouldn't know if i was kidding or not so what makes you think you can define someone when you have no way of knowing the meaning behind their words?

LOL...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Read the Tea Party platform, I'm not wrong. You may be correct about the corruption though. You blame the Republicans and never question the Corporations. Pretty typical for all parties.

Trading value for value is a complex statement today if you research the Petrol Dollar and the wars created to prevent it's change.

I tend to think that America should hold the same standards for imports as we do for exports. If we can't hire 12 year olds in America, then our imports shouldn't be able to. Pretty basic.

The issue it that there is no single Tea Party.

The Platform of the "The Tea Party Movement," which is one of several dozen Tea Party groups, looks very good.

{1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes
2. Eliminate the National Debt
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending
4. Protect Free Markets
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States
6. Promote Civic Responsibility
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government
8. Believe in the People
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics - American }

All of these are great, and I fully support them - but when they start becoming involved in gay marriage or abortion, then I think they violate this charter.

While you want to be ruler of the world, you aren't. You have no authority over China or any other nation. You are free to not buy products, but that is the extent of your authority over others.

 

[derk]

My opinion is... The two partiers are corrupt and they do it absolutely. No matter who gets in. They are in their system. They control the money and the message also the power once inside government. The only true way to be free of them is forced term limits. Once they are elected vote them out and let none of them make a career out of sucking at the public trough. Remain freer longer GO incumbent head hunting. Or the IRS could target you next year...muhwahhhhhh

 

[AntiParty]

I will defend my position on EVERY topic and do.

For future reference, saying you will defend your opinion is not actually defending your opinion.

Some think I'm taking sides when I correct flawed statements, like you.

I do not think you take sides when you correct my statements because you have never corrected my statements. All you have done is repeat the same things that I have already proven were wrong and declare yourself the winner of the debate, just like you are now.

If you think I'm unable to be changed then it's an opinion based topic, like many topics are in politics.

It is not an opinion, it is a statement of fact. If you were actually able to change your mind about something you would admit that you were wrong when you make a statement that is provably false.

I hold the right to my own opinion. YOU can not dictate my opinion. Your attempt to call me a Leftist if I don't agree with you just makes YOU look bad.

There you go accusing me of calling you a leftist again. I don't see how me not calling you a leftist simply because I disagree with you reflects badly on me, but I am not a religious zealot so I lack the ability to rationalize that you use to reach that conclusion.

For the record, I am saying you are wrong. That has nothing to do with what side of the aisle you are on, it is simply a matter of being wrong. Your deflection into claiming that I am calling you a leftist has absolutely no bearing on that, and is not something I have actually done. You just reflexively defend yourself by claiming you are not a leftist whenever anyone proves you are wrong about anything.

"defend your opinion does not mean defend your opinion"?............Not reading anything past that. I want to educate myself and clearly this will get me no where.

 

[AntiParty]

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

^Anti-Government and Anti-American. THE END.

Because we all know that America was founded on the idea that the government is never wrong.

America was founded with a Government and the citizens with the ability to make decisions to control the Government.....

If you really believe that all government is good, why are you in my thread?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

UMAD.

Clearly you have been scrambling for a way out of the turd the Right wing has held. I'm enjoying the show

You have been more "progressive" in your last 2 pages than ever in history I would think. Because you can't hold your debate without change. WEIRD how that works.

Unlike you, I am neither right, nor left, wing. One thing both wings of politics has in common is that they want more government, I want just enough to be able to tell it to F*** Off when it gets in my way. I have actually said that I want to cut all government spending, including defense. I am willing to defend my position with facts and figures because it is a position based on facts and figures, not an opinion based on fantasy.

I have spelled out, in detail, why you are wrong about things right here in this thread. Your response was to not participate in the debate for over a week, and then come back and pretend that no one has any facts or links to back up their position. The strange thing is that you are the one that doesn't have any facts, and that is why you resort to obfuscation.

Yea, you spelled it out perfectly. You don't understand my position because we hold different positions.

I am Anti-Party and you are Anti-Government. It's as simple as that. "I want to cut all government spending" is Anti-American. YOU are no Patriot and have no concept of We The People.

You stated, "I want to cut all tax funding including Defense"

You are a weakness to America and care more about your pocket book than the reason your pocket book has so much money in it. THINK ABOUT THAT.

You state that I don't have any facts. I don't post anything but facts and encourage people to prove my facts wrong, so I have facts and not bias nonsense. There is a reason 99.9% of people who respond to me state short insulting statements, because I hold facts, math, statistics, history, EDUCATION.

Anyone who believes that government spending is too high across the board is anti-American? Show me that this is a fact and post some supporting arguments, since I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume that you can't provide evidence other than your own opinion and anecdote.

 

[AntiParty]

Read the Tea Party platform, I'm not wrong. You may be correct about the corruption though. You blame the Republicans and never question the Corporations. Pretty typical for all parties.

Trading value for value is a complex statement today if you research the Petrol Dollar and the wars created to prevent it's change.

I tend to think that America should hold the same standards for imports as we do for exports. If we can't hire 12 year olds in America, then our imports shouldn't be able to. Pretty basic.

The issue it that there is no single Tea Party.

The Platform of the "The Tea Party Movement," which is one of several dozen Tea Party groups, looks very good.

{1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes
2. Eliminate the National Debt
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending
4. Protect Free Markets
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States
6. Promote Civic Responsibility
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government
8. Believe in the People
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics - American }

All of these are great, and I fully support them - but when they start becoming involved in gay marriage or abortion, then I think they violate this charter.

While you want to be ruler of the world, you aren't. You have no authority over China or any other nation. You are free to not buy products, but that is the extent of your authority over others.

"It that there"?.....anyway.

I'm fully aware of the Tea Party platform, but ty for posting it for others.

You are correct about the platform. Most parties want to meet all of those goals, not just the Tea Party. The big difference is how they act. We don't lower taxation by shutting down the government. That is what a child would do when he can't figure out his test, he would throw down his pencil and walk out. You have to have the ability to think if you want to be a part of politics and government even at the lowest levels.

Also, the Tea party fights to free markets for profits. If you haven't seen this im embarrassed for you. I'm all about less government until my child has a toy made in China with lead paint on it. The tea party never compromises on the free market, they just want it free for profit. Perhaps a "no lead paint in toys but stop the excessive method used for scraping paint off of homes". You see, you can recognize that it costs thousands of dollars to use drop clothes and dispose of lead paint properly while also understanding that lead paint regulations are good for our children. Understand?

NOT ALL REGULATIONS ARE BAD REGULATIONS............................

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I will defend my position on EVERY topic and do.

For future reference, saying you will defend your opinion is not actually defending your opinion.



I do not think you take sides when you correct my statements because you have never corrected my statements. All you have done is repeat the same things that I have already proven were wrong and declare yourself the winner of the debate, just like you are now.



It is not an opinion, it is a statement of fact. If you were actually able to change your mind about something you would admit that you were wrong when you make a statement that is provably false.

I hold the right to my own opinion. YOU can not dictate my opinion. Your attempt to call me a Leftist if I don't agree with you just makes YOU look bad.

There you go accusing me of calling you a leftist again. I don't see how me not calling you a leftist simply because I disagree with you reflects badly on me, but I am not a religious zealot so I lack the ability to rationalize that you use to reach that conclusion.

For the record, I am saying you are wrong. That has nothing to do with what side of the aisle you are on, it is simply a matter of being wrong. Your deflection into claiming that I am calling you a leftist has absolutely no bearing on that, and is not something I have actually done. You just reflexively defend yourself by claiming you are not a leftist whenever anyone proves you are wrong about anything.

"defend your opinion does not mean defend your opinion"?............Not reading anything past that. I want to educate myself and clearly this will get me no where.

You didn't read past the part where you saw something I didn't write?

Not sure how I am supposed to feel about that. I should point out that seeing things that are not there, AKA hallucinations, is symptomatic of some rather severe mental illnesses, and that maybe, just maybe, you should look into getting help for that. Then again, I am not really a nice person, so I might not point that out after all.