Why has "COMPROMISE" become a dirty word to Republican Conservatives?

[IlarMeilyr]

"Why has "COMPROMISE" become a dirty word to Republican Conservatives"

Because they're extremists and ideologues who adhere blindly to failed conservative dogma.

Wrong. It's because you and your fellow failed liberal socialist ideologues misuse the word itself.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

It does. Your ongoing inability to understand such matters speaks far more to your weak intellect and piss poor educational accomplishments.

But I'm here to help. Let's start things off very slowly for your greatest chance of ever catching on:

"Compromise" is a word. Words have meaning. The meaning of the word is also, often, somewhat dependent on the context in which it is used.

You liberals tend to ignorantly (although sometimes with full knowledge and conscious choice) misuse words. You do so for different reasons. Sometimes its because you really don't know that words have precise meanings (as opposed to the gibberish spin you put on them). Other times you simply CHOOSE to ignore the context in which the words may be used.

I realize you are having huge difficulty with this. Get a kindly adult to help you out.

Republicans are cool with compromise — just not with President Obama



Pew, though, has also shown increase in support for compromise. While Americans preferred purity 54-40 percent in its poll in January 2011, compromise took the lead after the 2012 election, 50-44.

Similarly, this new NBC/WSJ poll even shows a plurality of Republicans now favor compromise, 49-45. Whoa, if true.

But before you good-government types get all high on the concept of compromise in the months and years ahead, I present to you: A wet blanket.

The one key word missing from NBC/WSJ's and Pew's previous polls? "Obama." And when you throw him into the mix, all bets are off.



Republicans and Republican-leaning voters prefer their leaders to "stand up" to Obama rather than compromise by a striking 66-32 percent. That's a far cry from NBC/WSJ's 49-45 percent pro-compromise split. And we would wager that it's all about invoking O-word, along with the idea of "standing up" to him.

(For what it's worth, the same question was asked of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters about their party working with GOP leaders. Democrats preferred working together 52-43 percent. So again, the anti-compromise thing is largely a GOP phenomenon.)

So, yes, the American people generally like the idea of compromise, and even Republicans could be on board with it. But the moment that compromise becomes "with Barack Obama," any notion of a kumbaya moment goes out the window.

Republicans are cool with compromise — just not with President Obama

When "compromise" with that dickless idiot invariably turns out to be worth less than the paper on which an agreement is printed, then it does become rather pointless to negotiate with him or entertain any more 'compromise." He takes and takes, but he doesn't give.

What other ******* President refers to his opposing political party as "the enemy?"

He works on a treaty. He sees that it will never get ratified. He then deliberately mis-labels it as anything other than a "treaty." The worthless compromise driven feckless GOP in the Senate then capitulate to that Constitutional nonsense. Suddenly, it becomes another mere bill or Act. Now instead of 2/3rds of the Senate being needed to ratify the treaty, a simple majority will get it approved.

Failing all of that, of course, the idiot in chief (a former law lecturer on the Constitution of all things) even floats the notion that he can dispense with Congress all together by the simple expedient of some authority to issue Executive Orders.

There is no compromise possible with an inherently unprincipled piece of shit like Obumbler.

And since what he has consistently sought is FAR from being in our national interest, there is damn little reason to even SEEK compromise.

 

[oreo]

Th GOP is run by extremists . Rino is also a bad word! God forbid u have a centrist politican wh appeals to the majority of Americans !!!

You hit that on the nail--100% agreed. I am a conservative--& I asked someone who used the word RHINO what their definition of that was. They replied--It's someone who is pretending to be a Republican but is really a Democrat. Who are they supporting? Donald Trump who fits that definition to a pea.

This is how stupid they are.
Column: Trump exploits rational political ignorance

They never read a dam thing. Their rally sessions are on Reich wing talk radio--Rush Limpass--Shawn Shamity--and Mark Levinturd. All who are ENTERTAINERS themselves--who feed out the bull-shit for ratings and MONEY. They aren't going to tell the Reich wing audiences the TRUTH about what is going on, that would mean LESS ratings and LESS money. They are required to keep their audiences at a certain level of hysteria to keep the money rolling in. Would they disclose to their audiences that Trump really should be running on the Democrat ticket, as he is well known for supporting liberal Democrat policies--and is referred to as the Liberals-Liberal for a reason. Oh HELL NO

So the worst part of this, is that these morons vote and select candidates that are there to obstruct anything and everything that comes down the pipeline. The TED CRUZ type candidates that wouldn't have a snow-balls chance of winning the White House, but he can sure as hell make certain that no other Republican will either.
What Ted Cruz Really Stands For | RealClearPolitics

This is why John Boehner quit--only in an effort to OBSTRUCT Ted Cruz from putting on one of his dog & pony shows right in the middle of a Presidential election cycle. This is why Paul Ryan doesn't want to be house speaker. And who would, if you had to listen to this bull-shit day in--day out.



And this is what they want to turn the Republican house into

Then they have the audacity to compare themselves with RONALD REAGAN--LOL. Not even close, Ronald Reagan was able to work with a hostile Democrat congress & Senate and he got things done.

 

[Dad2three]

Good for you Bubba, get that Southern CONservative CONfederate States of AmeriKKKa support for the GOP, why worry about pretending you aren't anything but a KKK loving right wing moron!

I'm not a Democrat. The KKK was a Democrat organization, BUBBA.

KKK WAS CONservatives moron. UNLESS you "think" the SOUTHERN CONservative CONfederate States of AmeriKKKa was some huge liberal bastion?

It was Democrat, Moron. Ever hear of Senator Byrd? He wasn't a Republican.

Saying LIBERALS ARE RUNNING THOSE SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVE CONFEDERATE STATES BUBBA? Seriously? lol

Fool, I said the KKK was a Democrat organization. You really are some kind of stupid.

And the Dems USED to be CONservatives, they've switched parties several times since the PROGRESSIVE ABE'S GOP was founded dummy!

IDEOLOGY OF THE KKK WAS ALWAYS AND IS, CONservative!

 

[IlarMeilyr]

When the libs distort the meaning of the word "compromise" itself, of course the word "compromise" takes on a dirty hue.

The true meaning of "compromise" is all well and good and not the subject of any complaint.

But negotiating with liberal socialist Democrat Parody political hacks in Congress and the White House often involves "compromise" which is NOT true compromise. It is merely a slow-cook version of capitulation. Boehner was very good at 'comrpomising' with the likes of Obumbler and Senate Democrap leadershit.

Right, Carter/Clinton had 20% of GDP in revenues Ronnie gutted it to 17% AS he tripled debt, gut taxes on the rich AND increased it on the average working man. Dubya said Ronnie was weak, HE gutted revenues from 20% to less than 15% of GDP WHILE blowing up spending to 25% of GDP. Yet the GOP says no to increasing revenues? lol

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Only total ass licking douche bag brain washed laughable liberals refer to Tea Party advocates as TeaTards in the first place.

 

[the_human_being]

When the libs distort the meaning of the word "compromise" itself, of course the word "compromise" takes on a dirty hue.

The true meaning of "compromise" is all well and good and not the subject of any complaint.

But negotiating with liberal socialist Democrat Parody political hacks in Congress and the White House often involves "compromise" which is NOT true compromise. It is merely a slow-cook version of capitulation. Boehner was very good at 'comrpomising' with the likes of Obumbler and Senate Democrap leadershit.

Right, Carter/Clinton had 20% of GDP in revenues Ronnie gutted it to 17% AS he tripled debt, gut taxes on the rich AND increased it on the average working man. Dubya said Ronnie was weak, HE gutted revenues from 20% to less than 15% of GDP WHILE blowing up spending to 25% of GDP. Yet the GOP says no to increasing revenues? lol

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Haven't seen any Teatards cursing like you Liberals seem to do so easily. It has to do with class. Look up the word "class".

 

[Dad2three]

"Why has "COMPROMISE" become a dirty word to Republican Conservatives"

Because they're extremists and ideologues who adhere blindly to failed conservative dogma.

Wrong. It's because you and your fellow failed liberal socialist ideologues misuse the word itself.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

It does. Your ongoing inability to understand such matters speaks far more to your weak intellect and piss poor educational accomplishments.

But I'm here to help. Let's start things off very slowly for your greatest chance of ever catching on:

"Compromise" is a word. Words have meaning. The meaning of the word is also, often, somewhat dependent on the context in which it is used.

You liberals tend to ignorantly (although sometimes with full knowledge and conscious choice) misuse words. You do so for different reasons. Sometimes its because you really don't know that words have precise meanings (as opposed to the gibberish spin you put on them). Other times you simply CHOOSE to ignore the context in which the words may be used.

I realize you are having huge difficulty with this. Get a kindly adult to help you out.

Republicans are cool with compromise — just not with President Obama



Pew, though, has also shown increase in support for compromise. While Americans preferred purity 54-40 percent in its poll in January 2011, compromise took the lead after the 2012 election, 50-44.

Similarly, this new NBC/WSJ poll even shows a plurality of Republicans now favor compromise, 49-45. Whoa, if true.

But before you good-government types get all high on the concept of compromise in the months and years ahead, I present to you: A wet blanket.

The one key word missing from NBC/WSJ's and Pew's previous polls? "Obama." And when you throw him into the mix, all bets are off.



Republicans and Republican-leaning voters prefer their leaders to "stand up" to Obama rather than compromise by a striking 66-32 percent. That's a far cry from NBC/WSJ's 49-45 percent pro-compromise split. And we would wager that it's all about invoking O-word, along with the idea of "standing up" to him.

(For what it's worth, the same question was asked of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters about their party working with GOP leaders. Democrats preferred working together 52-43 percent. So again, the anti-compromise thing is largely a GOP phenomenon.)

So, yes, the American people generally like the idea of compromise, and even Republicans could be on board with it. But the moment that compromise becomes "with Barack Obama," any notion of a kumbaya moment goes out the window.

Republicans are cool with compromise — just not with President Obama

When "compromise" with that dickless idiot invariably turns out to be worth less than the paper on which an agreement is printed, then it does become rather pointless to negotiate with him or entertain any more 'compromise." He takes and takes, but he doesn't give.

What other ******* President refers to his opposing political party as "the enemy?"

He works on a treaty. He sees that it will never get ratified. He then deliberately mis-labels it as anything other than a "treaty." The worthless compromise driven feckless GOP in the Senate then capitulate to that Constitutional nonsense. Suddenly, it becomes another mere bill or Act. Now instead of 2/3rds of the Senate being needed to ratify the treaty, a simple majority will get it approved.

Failing all of that, of course, the idiot in chief (a former law lecturer on the Constitution of all things) even floats the notion that he can dispense with Congress all together by the simple expedient of some authority to issue Executive Orders.

There is no compromise possible with an inherently unprincipled piece of shit like Obumbler.

And since what he has consistently sought is FAR from being in our national interest, there is damn little reason to even SEEK compromise.

Good for you Bubba, you posit the right wings low informed hate for Obama, the second best conservative Prez since Ike (only BJ Bill was better) to a tee

Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett: Face it, Obama is a conservative


President Barack Obama “has governed as a moderate conservative,” former Reagan administration domestic policy aide Bruce Bartlett writes in a new essay for the eclectic American Conservative magazine.

Bartlett, an economic policy expert who left the Republican Party amid disgust with President George W. Bush’s fiscal policies and backed Obama in 2008, contends that a look at Obama’s track record reveals a president who’s basically a liberal Republican of yore. From the beginning of his administration, Bartlett argues, Obama has charted a center-right course on both foreign and domestic policy issues.

Populating his administration with hawks like Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama has presided over new military engagements abroad while overseeing a draconian crackdown on national security leaks at home, Bartlett notes.

Meanwhile, Obama has pursued “very conservative” fiscal policies, Bartlett writes, signing a stimulus package that was far smaller than what experts and advisers like Christina Romer found would be necessary to really prime the nation’s economic pump. Moreover, Obama has conducted himself like a deficit hawk, “proposing much deeper cuts in spending and the deficit than did the Republicans during the 2011 budget negotiations,” when a deal eluded the two parties. And don’t buy into the the GOP “harping” that Obama hates business, Bartlett cautions. The president, he says, “has bent over backward to protect corporate profits.”

Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett: Face it, Obama is a conservative - Salon.com


Obama Is a Republican
He’s the heir to Richard Nixon, not Saul Alinsky

Obama Is a Republican

 

[the_human_being]

I'm not a Democrat. The KKK was a Democrat organization, BUBBA.

KKK WAS CONservatives moron. UNLESS you "think" the SOUTHERN CONservative CONfederate States of AmeriKKKa was some huge liberal bastion?

It was Democrat, Moron. Ever hear of Senator Byrd? He wasn't a Republican.

Saying LIBERALS ARE RUNNING THOSE SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVE CONFEDERATE STATES BUBBA? Seriously? lol

Fool, I said the KKK was a Democrat organization. You really are some kind of stupid.

And the Dems USED to be CONservatives, they've switched parties several times since the PROGRESSIVE ABE'S GOP was founded dummy!

IDEOLOGY OF THE KKK WAS ALWAYS AND IS, CONservative!

But it was chock full of folks who voted DEMOCRAT.

 

[Dad2three]

Right, Carter/Clinton had 20% of GDP in revenues Ronnie gutted it to 17% AS he tripled debt, gut taxes on the rich AND increased it on the average working man. Dubya said Ronnie was weak, HE gutted revenues from 20% to less than 15% of GDP WHILE blowing up spending to 25% of GDP. Yet the GOP says no to increasing revenues? lol

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Only total ass licking douche bag brain washed laughable liberals refer to Tea Party advocates as TeaTards in the first place.

Those Klowns who wanted to keep Gov't hands off their Medicare and were upset Obama was black??? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Right, Carter/Clinton had 20% of GDP in revenues Ronnie gutted it to 17% AS he tripled debt, gut taxes on the rich AND increased it on the average working man. Dubya said Ronnie was weak, HE gutted revenues from 20% to less than 15% of GDP WHILE blowing up spending to 25% of GDP. Yet the GOP says no to increasing revenues? lol

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Haven't seen any Teatards cursing like you Liberals seem to do so easily. It has to do with class. Look up the word "class".

I DON'T WANT TO PLAY NICE WITH RIGHT WING SCUM BUCKETS LIKE YOU BUBBA!

 

[Dad2three]

KKK WAS CONservatives moron. UNLESS you "think" the SOUTHERN CONservative CONfederate States of AmeriKKKa was some huge liberal bastion?

It was Democrat, Moron. Ever hear of Senator Byrd? He wasn't a Republican.

Saying LIBERALS ARE RUNNING THOSE SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVE CONFEDERATE STATES BUBBA? Seriously? lol

Fool, I said the KKK was a Democrat organization. You really are some kind of stupid.

And the Dems USED to be CONservatives, they've switched parties several times since the PROGRESSIVE ABE'S GOP was founded dummy!

IDEOLOGY OF THE KKK WAS ALWAYS AND IS, CONservative!

But it was chock full of folks who voted DEMOCRAT.

Until parties changed? Yep

WHICH PARTY WAS FIGHTING FOR THE CONFEDERATE TRAITORS FLAG RECENTLY BUBBA? LOL

 

[Dad2three]

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Only total ass licking douche bag brain washed laughable liberals refer to Tea Party advocates as TeaTards in the first place.

Those Klowns who wanted to keep Gov't hands off their Medicare and were upset Obama was black??? lol

I am not sure what it is you imagine you are now discussing.

There WERE some confused folks who didn't grasp that Medicare was a thing the government could not, by definition, keep their hands off. But if you are talking about such an insignificant minority, then your willingness toe engage in vast over generalizations is very revealing.

And yes. There were some racists who opposed Obumbler on the basis of the fact that he is black. The Tea Party movement did NOT ever embrace such racist thinking. A very few people who did speak out were seized upon by the liberal propaganda apparatchik media in order to marginalize the legitimate Tea Party movement by claiming (as you now falsely repeat) that such folks were representative of the Tea Party as a whole. It wasn't true then and it never has been true.

Aside from your consistently sloppy and dishonest effort to repeat baseless propaganda as you far left wing liberal drek are prone to doing so frequently, do you have anything logical or meaningful or even honest to say?

 

[kwc57]

Has anyone ever heard a Democrat make such statements? Anarchy is not what the founding fathers intended. Compromise is how a democracy is able to function. Compromise is how our Constitution was written and ratified. What the far right now calls RINOs is what the Republican Party used to be. Radical extremist obstructionism is no way to govern.

Definition of COMPROMISE

a : settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions

b : something intermediate between or blending qualities of two different things

compromise | a way of reaching agreement in which each person or group gives up something that was wanted in order to end an argument or dispute

consensus | a general agreement about something : an idea or opinion that is shared by all the people in a group

Liberals have their heads so far up their asses, they don't remember that Harry Reid killed over 300 bills during a two year period. Killed as in refused to let them be discussed, debated and voted on. The House worked night and day churning out bipartisan bills (50 of the 300 killed bills were authored by Dems) and Harry just sat with his thumb up his ass. He was protecting Obama to keep him from having to veto bills against their ideology that they knew the American people wanted. The fact that the Senate Dems couldn't point to a single thing accomplished due to Reid's killing all of those bills is why the Dems lost the Senate. So. tell us again WHO doesn't compromise? Since Harry lost the Senate, Congress is actually debating, voting and passing bills for the President to sign. Look it up.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Haven't seen any Teatards cursing like you Liberals seem to do so easily. It has to do with class. Look up the word "class".

I DON'T WANT TO PLAY NICE WITH RIGHT WING SCUM BUCKETS LIKE YOU BUBBA!

You mean you are incapable of playing nice or honestly or intelligently because you area babbling simpleton liberal joke. But I repeat myself.

 

[the_human_being]

Not that you have no credibility of any kind (perish the notion), but:

First off, you would benefit in that department by citing your sources. Try to find sources that are credible.

Secondly, try to formulate ACTUAL arguments. I am ok with you rattling off statistics. But FROM those statistics you SHOULD be able to then spell out a premise or two -- and then conjoin those premises with some logical claim (which might itself be open to additional discussion and analysis). This way you will have formed a syllogism.

With luck and practice you might, someday, with a lot of help, formulate a coherent argument. I doubt you will ever be persuasive. But, wtf? Give it at least a CHANCE.

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Haven't seen any Teatards cursing like you Liberals seem to do so easily. It has to do with class. Look up the word "class".

I DON'T WANT TO PLAY NICE WITH RIGHT WING SCUM BUCKETS LIKE YOU BUBBA!

I know. It's your depravity. You are a victim of your own depravity.

 

[Dad2three]

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Only total ass licking douche bag brain washed laughable liberals refer to Tea Party advocates as TeaTards in the first place.

Those Klowns who wanted to keep Gov't hands off their Medicare and were upset Obama was black??? lol

I am not sure what it is you imagine you are now discussing.

There WERE some confused folks who didn't grasp that Medicare was a thing the government could not, by definition, keep their hands off. But if you are talking about such an insignificant minority, then your willingness toe engage in vast over generalizations is very revealing.

And yes. There were some racists who opposed Obumbler on the basis of the fact that he is black. The Tea Party movement did NOT ever embrace such racist thinking. A very few people who did speak out were seized upon by the liberal propaganda apparatchik media in order to marginalize the legitimate Tea Party movement by claiming (as you now falsely repeat) that such folks were representative of the Tea Party as a whole. It wasn't true then and it never has been true.

Aside from your consistently sloppy and dishonest effort to repeat baseless propaganda as you far left wing liberal drek are prone to doing so frequently, do you have anything logical or meaningful or even honest to say?

Yet for SOME odd reason the TeaTards "thought" by some strange reason, Obama was a Muslim from Kenya? lol

ALL you have is right wing spin Bubs, the TeaTards have shown it was BECAUSE we elected Obama they were created, NOT taxes which at that point were the lowest tax burden since the 1960's AND Dubya had blown up spending for 8 years!

 

[Dad2three]

HOW'S THIS BUBBA

FUKK YOU

ANY post i have you question ANY I will source for the low informed baggers

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

He's flying off into that familiar Liberal rage of cursing with every breath now. A total throwback to the stone age.

You mean I'm going down to the TeaTards level because of the scum they are? Yep

Haven't seen any Teatards cursing like you Liberals seem to do so easily. It has to do with class. Look up the word "class".

I DON'T WANT TO PLAY NICE WITH RIGHT WING SCUM BUCKETS LIKE YOU BUBBA!

You mean you are incapable of playing nice or honestly or intelligently because you area babbling simpleton liberal joke. But I repeat myself.

Sure Bubs, Sure

We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20% of GDP and 4 straight surpluses (3 after vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut) . Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important. The debt has gone up $12+ trillion since then.

 

[the_human_being]

It was Democrat, Moron. Ever hear of Senator Byrd? He wasn't a Republican.

Saying LIBERALS ARE RUNNING THOSE SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVE CONFEDERATE STATES BUBBA? Seriously? lol

Fool, I said the KKK was a Democrat organization. You really are some kind of stupid.

And the Dems USED to be CONservatives, they've switched parties several times since the PROGRESSIVE ABE'S GOP was founded dummy!

IDEOLOGY OF THE KKK WAS ALWAYS AND IS, CONservative!

But it was chock full of folks who voted DEMOCRAT.

Until parties changed? Yep

WHICH PARTY WAS FIGHTING FOR THE CONFEDERATE TRAITORS FLAG RECENTLY BUBBA? LOL

Well, that certainly took you long enough to accept as fact. Did any of your people take any part in the Civil War or were you all Nazis?

 

[Dad2three]

Saying LIBERALS ARE RUNNING THOSE SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVE CONFEDERATE STATES BUBBA? Seriously? lol

Fool, I said the KKK was a Democrat organization. You really are some kind of stupid.

And the Dems USED to be CONservatives, they've switched parties several times since the PROGRESSIVE ABE'S GOP was founded dummy!

IDEOLOGY OF THE KKK WAS ALWAYS AND IS, CONservative!

But it was chock full of folks who voted DEMOCRAT.

Until parties changed? Yep

WHICH PARTY WAS FIGHTING FOR THE CONFEDERATE TRAITORS FLAG RECENTLY BUBBA? LOL

Well, that certainly took you long enough to accept as fact. Did any of your people take any part in the Civil War or were you all Nazis?

Got it Bubba, you ignore the SOUTHERN CONservative CONfederate States were KKK's like today. Shocking


How about this though Bubs, AFTER you are done getting on your knees for me again, I'll let you spit this time K Bubs?

 

[the_human_being]

Not my problem Bubba. Like I said earlier, my people have never been defeated by the US military. As a matter of fact, we were very successful in massacring them.