Left/Right should ALL read this!

[Liability]

Since I've given everyone ample time to reply, we can now say that what originally drove the Tea Party movement - giving billions to financial institutions because they were too big to fail - has not been a concern for teabaggers since around March, 2009, 2 months after Obama took office. Which coincides with the first FOXNEWS Tea Party rally.

Thanks for playing.

The original motivation for the Tea Party certainly included opposition to the giving of public funds to private corporations. But that was not "the" only original motivation.

And the adherents of the Tea Party philosophy certainly continue to object to it undeR the "leadership" [sic] of the liberal Democratic presently infesting the Oval Office.

Thanks for making a bigger ass of yourself, SimpleHolic.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"Debates are not my strong suit," Texas governor Rick Perry conceded, in a bit of an understatement, while talking to reporters after Tuesday night's GOP presidential debate at Dartmouth College. "But you know we get up and do 'em and we just try to let people see our passion."

Perry's debate performance was not disastrous like the September 22 showing in Florida that sent him spiraling downward in the polls. But it wasn't close to what he needed to bounce back. Mitt Romney and Herman Cain dominated the debate Tuesday evening, with Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann offering flashes of wit and intelligence. Perry just seemed sleepy and lackluster. He lacked command of the room and, at times, his words.

While Perry is certainly down, he's not out--at least not quite yet. After the debate ended, Perry showed off his skills as a retail politician at a small event with Dartmouth students. At the Beta fraternity house, Perry enthusiastically gave his stump speech. He warned about the debt hanging over their generation and perfectly recited his line about making D.C. as inconsequential to their lives as possible.

During a brief question-and-answer session, Perry asked students to raise their hands if they think Social Security will be around for them when they retire. Two or three hands popped up. "Those guys believe in the Tooth Fairy, as well," Perry cracked. The students laughed. "Just kidding, brother," he added with a smile.

Perry spent 10 minutes shaking hands after he spoke. He asked students questions about their lives, displaying a near-Clintonesque ability to make each student feel like he or she is the only one in the room. The dull Perry who showed up at Tuesday's debate was not the same upbeat and good humored Perry who showed up at the Beta house."

Put Down The Pipe; Step AWAY!​

So.......what IS it that get's Rick so UP??!!!!



Is it some o' that legendary Texas HOME-COOKED METH.....or, is he (just) smokin' a lil' "rock"??????

​

 

[Synthaholic]

Since I've given everyone ample time to reply, we can now say that what originally drove the Tea Party movement - giving billions to financial institutions because they were too big to fail - has not been a concern for teabaggers since around March, 2009, 2 months after Obama took office. Which coincides with the first FOXNEWS Tea Party rally.

Thanks for playing.

The original motivation for the Tea Party certainly included opposition to the giving of public funds to private corporations. But that was not "the" only original motivation.

And the adherents of the Tea Party philosophy certainly continue to object to it undeR the "leadership" [sic] of the liberal Democratic presently infesting the Oval Office.

Thanks for making a bigger ass of yourself, SimpleHolic.

OK - find some articles from the end of 2008 that show you to be correct.

If you do not, we'll all know that you're a liar.

 

[Liability]

Since I've given everyone ample time to reply, we can now say that what originally drove the Tea Party movement - giving billions to financial institutions because they were too big to fail - has not been a concern for teabaggers since around March, 2009, 2 months after Obama took office. Which coincides with the first FOXNEWS Tea Party rally.

Thanks for playing.

The original motivation for the Tea Party certainly included opposition to the giving of public funds to private corporations. But that was not "the" only original motivation.

And the adherents of the Tea Party philosophy certainly continue to object to it undeR the "leadership" [sic] of the liberal Democratic presently infesting the Oval Office.

Thanks for making a bigger ass of yourself, SimpleHolic.

OK - find some articles from the end of 2008 that show you to be correct.

If you do not, we'll all know that you're a liar.

LOL.

You play that fraudulent game all the time, stupid. You always get your ass handed to you. Yet you never tire of it.

You are mindless.

Whether I deign to jump through hoops for an asshole like you or not, the fact remains: YOU made the original claim needle dick. Accordingly, YOU carry the burden of proof. And you always try to shrug it off.

Now as to your "request," try to be specific, you ******* illiterate goon.

What exactly is it that you now claim I "lied" about?

What, exactly, do you want pre-2009 "proof" of? Be specific, asshole.

 

[Synthaholic]

The original motivation for the Tea Party certainly included opposition to the giving of public funds to private corporations. But that was not "the" only original motivation.

And the adherents of the Tea Party philosophy certainly continue to object to it undeR the "leadership" [sic] of the liberal Democratic presently infesting the Oval Office.

Thanks for making a bigger ass of yourself, SimpleHolic.

OK - find some articles from the end of 2008 that show you to be correct.

If you do not, we'll all know that you're a liar.

LOL.

You play that fraudulent game all the time, stupid. You always get your ass handed to you. Yet you never tire of it.

You are mindless.

Whether I deign to jump through hoops for an asshole like you or not, the fact remains: YOU made the original claim needle dick. Accordingly, YOU carry the burden of proof. And you always try to shrug it off.

Now as to your "request," try to be specific, you ******* illiterate goon.

What exactly is it that you now claim I "lied" about?

What, exactly, do you want pre-2009 "proof" of? Be specific, asshole.

Clean the spittle off your monitor and pay attention:

Show me articles from the end of 2008 that show the Tea Party was concerned with issues other than the bailouts.

All your histrionics do not cloud my request.

 

[Liability]

The Tea Party had its roots in an organized demonstration on April 15, 2009.

Funny that SimplyAssholic is now demanding "evidence" that precedes that historic date.

 

[Liability]

History of the Tea Party Movement — Infoplease.com

 

[Liability]

I performed a very basic (and easy) Google search and found a Malkin piece that referred to a Liberty Belle blog. It traces the roots of the Tea Party movement back to the Santelli speech in Chicago:

Friday, February 20, 2009
Economics 101
I have been so busy at work that I have not had a chance to post anything new today, though all I think about in the back of my head are all the issues that I want to discuss. If you haven't guessed by now, the issue nearest and dearest to my heart is economics and by extension, the size of government, specifically the federal government. I'm a bit obsessed with economics, and the lack of economic education and understanding that permeates this nation. As I'm sure most of you have seen by now, Rick Santelli made the most beautifully frustrated statements recently. He is a journalist with CNBC and he may just be one of my new heroes.


I was screaming, "Yes! Yes! Yes! You tell 'em Rick!!!!!" And now of course White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and His Majesty's other henchmen have been dispersed to not only rebut Rick's sentiments (which are based in fact, but who cares about that) but to also smear the man himself. * * * *

Redistributing Knowledge


Again, though, of course, it violates the fantasy date-restriction of the generally dishonest hack, SimplyAssholic.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

(Claiming OWS is mainstream, middle of the road Americana isn't going to cut it. Doug Schoen's polling is out and these are Obama's guys, put there as props and stage dressing while Obama, Grandmaw Piven, Van Jones, Stephen Lerner, Andy Stern, et al manipulate and orchestrate the collapse of the American economy and then shortly thereafter the American political system. Seen this all before in a single lifetime. One of my greatest regrets is not having been able to help those nice Ohio National Guardsmen police the Kent State Campus by bringing a tthousand or so fellow Americans to help convince those foolish students of their errant ways. This would be a vastly different country today, with students who absolutely know nothing of life other what has been drilled into their brains by their Marxist professors restricted to their campuses until they grew up and matured. Allowing less than forty year olds the right to vote in this country was a seriously dumb idea.)

"[T]he movement doesn’t represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.

The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment rate (9.1%) ....

What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas."

The Volokh Conspiracy » Polling the Occupy Wall Street Protestors

 

[Synthaholic]

The Tea Party had its roots in an organized demonstration on April 15, 2009.

Funny that SimplyAssholic is now demanding "evidence" that precedes that historic date.

Then start calling Greta Van Susteren "Miss Cleo"!!!!

On the February 27 edition of On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren said: " 'Tea party' protests are erupting across the country. Angry taxpayers, or at least some of them, are taking to the streets in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party. People are protesting President Obama's massive $787 billion stimulus bill, his $3.55 trillion budget and a federal government that has been ballooning by the day since the president took office."
​

Tool.

 

[Synthaholic]

I performed a very basic (and easy) Google search and found a Malkin piece that referred to a Liberty Belle blog. It traces the roots of the Tea Party movement back to the Santelli speech in Chicago:

MALKIN???? No wonder you never have your facts straight, Waddles!

More recently, the anniversary of the original Boston Tea Party was commemorated on December 16, 2007, by Republican Congressman Ron Paul supporters who held a fund raising event for the 2008 presidential primaries advocating an end to fiat money and the Federal Reserve System, disengaging from foreign entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan, and upholding States' rights.[31][32][33]

Fox News commentator Juan Williams says that the TPM emerged from the ashes of Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.
​

and

According to pollster Scott Rasmussen, the bailouts of banks by the Bush and Obama administrations triggered the Tea Party's rise. The interviewer[clarification needed] added that the movement's anger centers on two issues, quoting Rasmussen as saying, "They think federal spending, deficits and taxes are too high, and they think no one in Washington is listening to them, and that latter point is really, really important."[51]
​

Now, you aren't going to call Rasmussen a liar, after all you wingnuts have worshiped his polling, are you???

 

[Synthaholic]

Rasmussen:

The Bush and Obama administrations’ bank bailouts triggered the tea party’s rise, he says.

“Voters are really upset about that,” Rasmussen explained. “Establishment figures said wait a minute, the bailouts saved America. Most Americans have the opposite belief.”

Establishment Democrats better take heed too, he says. “There’s also a populist movement on the political left who don’t believe Washington is listening to them.”
​

And we are seeing that now with #OWS.

 

[Liability]

I performed a very basic (and easy) Google search and found a Malkin piece that referred to a Liberty Belle blog. It traces the roots of the Tea Party movement back to the Santelli speech in Chicago:

MALKIN???? No wonder you never have your facts straight, Waddles!

More recently, the anniversary of the original Boston Tea Party was commemorated on December 16, 2007, by Republican Congressman Ron Paul supporters who held a fund raising event for the 2008 presidential primaries advocating an end to fiat money and the Federal Reserve System, disengaging from foreign entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan, and upholding States' rights.[31][32][33]

Fox News commentator Juan Williams says that the TPM emerged from the ashes of Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.
​

and

According to pollster Scott Rasmussen, the bailouts of banks by the Bush and Obama administrations triggered the Tea Party's rise. The interviewer[clarification needed] added that the movement's anger centers on two issues, quoting Rasmussen as saying, "They think federal spending, deficits and taxes are too high, and they think no one in Washington is listening to them, and that latter point is really, really important."[51]
​

Now, you aren't going to call Rasmussen a liar, after all you wingnuts have worshiped his polling, are you???

Yet again, pindick Synthia proves that he is far too stupid to engage in coherent, adult or intelligent debate.

Even after all this time, pindick Synthia persists in playing the fallacy game of attack the messenger.

Listen, pindick, it's actually pretty simple. Nobody cares who you like or dislike. Malkin is not now and never was the point, you mental midget.

She linked to the Liberty Belle blog and that blog (back BEFORE the actual inception of the Tea Party movement's triggering event) cited the motivation that undergirded the Tea Party movement.

You can engage in your unpersuasive fallacy shit all you want. It doesn't matter. You have zero credibility at this point anyway.

But what you cannot do (obviously) is refute the facts.

 

[Liability]

The Tea Party had its roots in an organized demonstration on April 15, 2009.

Funny that SimplyAssholic is now demanding "evidence" that precedes that historic date.

Then start calling Greta Van Susteren "Miss Cleo"!!!!

On the February 27 edition of On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren said: " 'Tea party' protests are erupting across the country. Angry taxpayers, or at least some of them, are taking to the streets in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party. People are protesting President Obama's massive $787 billion stimulus bill, his $3.55 trillion budget and a federal government that has been ballooning by the day since the president took office."
​

Tool.

Pindick, you pathetic imbecile, that's 2009.

So, why are you looking for proof that comes from 2008?

You are a transparently fraudulent dishonest partisan hack.

Pindick, you have no cred of any kind whatsoever.

 

[Synthaholic]

The Tea Party had its roots in an organized demonstration on April 15, 2009.

Funny that SimplyAssholic is now demanding "evidence" that precedes that historic date.

Then start calling Greta Van Susteren "Miss Cleo"!!!!

On the February 27 edition of On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren said: " 'Tea party' protests are erupting across the country. Angry taxpayers, or at least some of them, are taking to the streets in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party. People are protesting President Obama's massive $787 billion stimulus bill, his $3.55 trillion budget and a federal government that has been ballooning by the day since the president took office."
​

Tool.

Pindick, you pathetic imbecile, that's 2009.

So, why are you looking for proof that comes from 2008?

You are a transparently fraudulent dishonest partisan hack.

Pindick, you have no cred of any kind whatsoever.

I posted that to counter your bullshit:

The Tea Party had its roots in an organized demonstration on April 15, 2009.

Of course now you're going to say "organized demonstration", when you know damn well that I was asking about it's origins. This is how you deflect and change things around when you know that you don't have any facts.

So now we know that you lied when you said April 15, 2009.

Now, was the tea party movement brand-new when Greta said that? No of course it wasn't. It had been around since Ron Paul's presidential run in 2008. Just like the piece I posted says.

 

[Synthaholic]

Hey Liability, how about addressing the Rasmussen quotes? Why did you skip over that? Because it doesn't conform to your bullshit?

 

[Liability]

Then start calling Greta Van Susteren "Miss Cleo"!!!!

On the February 27 edition of On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren said: " 'Tea party' protests are erupting across the country. Angry taxpayers, or at least some of them, are taking to the streets in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party. People are protesting President Obama's massive $787 billion stimulus bill, his $3.55 trillion budget and a federal government that has been ballooning by the day since the president took office."
​

Tool.

Pindick, you pathetic imbecile, that's 2009.

So, why are you looking for proof that comes from 2008?

You are a transparently fraudulent dishonest partisan hack.

Pindick, you have no cred of any kind whatsoever.

I posted that to counter your bullshit:

The Tea Party had its roots in an organized demonstration on April 15, 2009.

Of course now you're going to say "organized demonstration", when you know damn well that I was asking about it's origins. This is how you deflect and change things around when you know that you don't have any facts.

So now we know that you lied when you said April 15, 2009.

Now, was the tea party movement brand-new when Greta said that? No of course it wasn't. It had been around since Ron Paul's presidential run in 2008. Just like the piece I posted says.

As everyone can plainly see, pindick, I didn't lie at all. You repeating that false claim only shows how locked into being a liar you remain.

I had, since the time of my post referencing the Tax Day initiation of the Tea Party movement, also offered the Malkin citation to the to Liberty Belle blog post in which the roots of the Tea Party Movement went back to the Santelli outburst in February, you dishonest hack.

Be that as it may, it still doesn't explain why you (being the dipshit pindick unpersuasive **** waffle that you have always been) insisted on "proof" prior to 2009.

Move your goal posts all you want.

But we all see you for the lying hack you are.

 

[Liability]

Hey Liability, how about addressing the Rasmussen quotes? Why did you skip over that? Because it doesn't conform to your bullshit?

The Rasmussen quotes?

You mean the ones where he says the bank bailouts "triggered" the protests?

How the **** does that refute anything I have maintained you imbecile?



Pindick, you can lie all you want to. But you are so plodding, pathetic and transparent that it will never do you any good.

There was more than one motivation behind the Tea Party movement, you idiot. Even the Rasmussen quote you now urgently cling to confirms that much. You babbling simpleton.

There still is more than one motivation behind the Tea Party movement.

 

[Synthaholic]

Hey Liability, how about addressing the Rasmussen quotes? Why did you skip over that? Because it doesn't conform to your bullshit?

The Rasmussen quotes?

You mean the ones where he says the bank bailouts "triggered" the protests?

How the **** does that refute anything I have maintained you imbecile?



Pindick, you can lie all you want to. But you are so plodding, pathetic and transparent that it will never do you any good.

There was more than one motivation behind the Tea Party movement, you idiot. Even the Rasmussen quote you now urgently cling to confirms that much. You babbling simpleton.

There still is more than one motivation behind the Tea Party movement.

It refutes your bullshit about it starting on April 15, 2009.

What's the matter, you don't believe Rasmussen any longer? But next week when somebody puts up a Rasmussen poll that shows Democrats are losing in this or that, you'll be right there to call it legit.

You're such a partisan hack.

 

[Liability]

Hey Liability, how about addressing the Rasmussen quotes? Why did you skip over that? Because it doesn't conform to your bullshit?

The Rasmussen quotes?

You mean the ones where he says the bank bailouts "triggered" the protests?

How the **** does that refute anything I have maintained you imbecile?



Pindick, you can lie all you want to. But you are so plodding, pathetic and transparent that it will never do you any good.

There was more than one motivation behind the Tea Party movement, you idiot. Even the Rasmussen quote you now urgently cling to confirms that much. You babbling simpleton.

There still is more than one motivation behind the Tea Party movement.

It refutes your bullshit about it starting on April 15, 2009.

What's the matter, you don't believe Rasmussen any longer? But next week when somebody puts up a Rasmussen poll that shows Democrats are losing in this or that, you'll be right there to call it legit.

You're such a partisan hack.

As I correctly noted, their roots are traced to that event, you pathetic liar.

You conveniently ignore the fact that I then traced it back even further.

All of which is just your transparent effort to deflect why YOU would seek "proof" from 2008.

Duck it again. We'll pretend not to notice what you are plainly doing, you spineless *****.

Rasmussen doesn't disprove anything I said, as we've now established yet again.

But YOU have YET to explain (at all, much less rationally) WHY you'd ask for proof dating back to 2008. You lying simpleton fraud.