drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 The irony of this...is that JW thinks that the tea party is trying to push tyranny on people. ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 yes, tyranny of a groundswell movement to make representatives accountable to the electorate and to be fiscally responsible these are outrageous concepts that try the souls of the truly enlightened and their proponents must be excoriated vigorously and minimized - if not removed from the public discourse lest these insolent ideas gain hold in the public will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 1, 2014 Author Share Posted February 1, 2014 Crazy that he has the same name as that terrible Buffalo sportswriter. The AP John Wawrow isn't so bad. The early morning ranter spews schit like a brain damaged Gatortard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 good question, but open to interpretation and attack on this board. it'll never be a winner. better question, would be how many anarchists did it take to screw in a light bulb? no one has an answer to that. jw Depends on how you define "winner" or "winning". If you apply the Charlie Sheen standard, then no the Tea Party isn't winning. The irony of this...is that JW thinks that the tea party is trying to push tyranny on people. ..... It's easy for people to criticize what they don't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 The irony of this...is that JW thinks that the tea party is trying to push tyranny on people. ..... That's because he defines tyranny as removing an individual's ability to compel others by force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 here's what i've seen the tea party accomplish: scaring the shite out or reasonable republicans by threat of primary challenges bankrolled by the koch's and their ilk. and they often win the primaries...but don't stand a chance in hell of winning the general election except in places where a progessive campaign dollar would have always been better being burned than spent on the election. bravo!!! the only downside is that reasonable republicans are forced into untenable and nonnegotiable positions slowing or stopping any chance at compromise and progress that would benefit the country as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 here's what i've seen the tea party accomplish: scaring the shite out or reasonable republicans by threat of primary challenges bankrolled by the koch's and their ilk. and they often win the primaries...but don't stand a chance in hell of winning the general election except in places where a progessive campaign dollar would have always been better being burned than spent on the election. bravo!!! the only downside is that reasonable republicans are forced into untenable and nonnegotiable positions slowing or stopping any chance at compromise and progress that would benefit the country as a whole. Lol.................what a hoot! I'm sorry to hear about your coma back in 2010.............when did you come out of it ? "reasonable republicans"..........twice.......lol the multiple Taxed Enough Already parties around the country are still strong, and will continue to influence the direction of the country Sorry..............hope that didn't "scare" you too much.................... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Lol.................what a hoot! I'm sorry to hear about your coma back in 2010.............when did you come out of it ? "reasonable republicans"..........twice.......lol the multiple Taxed Enough Already parties around the country are still strong, and will continue to influence the direction of the country Sorry..............hope that didn't "scare" you too much.................... . laugh some more. it's a losing strategy for the right. the places the tea party can win in general elections are already cemented by republicans. the rest are a net loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 laugh some more. it's a losing strategy for the right. the places the tea party can win in general elections are already cemented by republicans. the rest are a net loss. Given the latest stats on the ACA and how it's affecting actual voters, I think you'll see a result you didn't expect soon enough. But go on with KOCH BROTHERS!!! It's what helps you sleep at night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share Posted February 2, 2014 laugh some more. it's a losing strategy for the right. the places the tea party can win in general elections are already cemented by republicans. the rest are a net loss. This is the classic battle between moral and philisophical positions and positions borne out of expediency. One party says that the ends justify the means while the other party says, "no they don't". Romney lost to a better ground game. A more conservative person might have won despite that ground game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 This is the classic battle between moral and philisophical positions and positions borne out of expediency. One party says that the ends justify the means while the other party says, "no they don't". Romney lost to a better ground game. A more conservative person might have won despite that ground game. well,no. who exactly might have planned a better ground game than the guy who turned around the olympics? sarah palin? really, who is the republican messiah? brooks picked ryan today as the likely nominee as of today but then stated he'd win a few very important districts in mississippi. i tend to agree. what percentage of america identifies them self with the tea party even with the legitimate complaints re the aca so far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Given the latest stats on the ACA and how it's affecting actual voters, I think you'll see a result you didn't expect soon enough. But go on with KOCH BROTHERS!!! It's what helps you sleep at night follow the money. it's what any prudent investigator does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 follow the money. it's what any prudent investigator does. You mean the new ambassador to Norway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share Posted February 2, 2014 well,no. who exactly might have planned a better ground game than the guy who turned around the olympics? sarah palin? really, who is the republican messiah? brooks picked ryan today as the likely nominee as of today but then stated he'd win a few very important districts in mississippi. i tend to agree. what percentage of america identifies them self with the tea party even with the legitimate complaints re the aca so far? You continue to be an ass. Romney got beat by a better ground game. He certainly didn't get beat by a better candidate. Why are you connecting Sarah Palin with Mitt Romney? Answer me this. Should there be a minimum wage for physicians? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) i'm pretty sure you're giving the Tea Party a little too much credit. yourself, too. jw You aren't sure of anything. Your results confirm that. I'm merely making an observation based on the facts. If that deserves credit, so be it. Personally, I don't think it does. I don't want credit for what I am supposed to do, and that's another distinction between you and me. laugh some more. it's a losing strategy for the right. the places the tea party can win in general elections are already cemented by republicans. the rest are a net loss. You don't understand the TEA party at all either. And, just like John, you can do whatever you want with that information. Those of us with a grip on reality understand this: the TEA party has already won. Yes, that statement is boggling for you isn't it? I will explain in a single sentence: Consider the national discourse today, as compared to 2008, in terms of which issues we are talking about, which we are not, and the alternatives being discussed for each issue. Stop. Re-read that sentence before you say anything. Think. Ah....do you see it? Well, if you don't, there's not much I can do to help you. However, the only rational conclusion: the TEA party has moved the entire discussion, issue by issue, significantly to the right. Hence, they have won. Want an example? We are now talking about when the Keystone pipeline will be approved, not whether. If this is 2008, that's a DOA topic. No way it even gets evaluated seriously. There are a myriad of issues where the "zero point" has been moved significantly to the right, and, where issues that progressives want to talk about, are dead, while issues that are on the TEA party's list, WILL be spoken to by all. If that's not a win, I don't know what is. The national discourse has been moved vastly to the right, and Obama et al have been rendered powerless to stop it. That's the TEA party...winning. Meanwhile, the unmitigated morons like wawrow and yourself sit here, and haven't even realized what is happening. That's because you don't see things clearly. You'd rather wrap yourself in the MSNBC security blanket, and be Baghdad Bobbed to sleep every night. Well, as I said: that's your choice. But, neither of you understand the impact that the TEA party has ALREADY had, so, there's little chance you'll understand things going forward. EDIT: Here's my prediction for when you will finally understand the TEA party's success: when Hillary comes out with her campaign talking points. That's when you'll suddenly realize just how F'ed you and the progressive(socialist) agenda truly are. Edited February 2, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) You aren't sure of anything. Your results confirm that. I'm merely making an observation based on the facts. If that deserves credit, so be it. Personally, I don't think it does. I don't want credit for what I am supposed to do, and that's another distinction between you and me. You don't understand the TEA party at all either. And, just like John, you can do whatever you want with that information. Those of us with a grip on reality understand this: the TEA party has already won. Yes, that statement is boggling for you isn't it? I will explain in a single sentence: Consider the national discourse today, as compared to 2008, in terms of which issues we are talking about, which we are not, and the alternatives being discussed for each issue. Stop. Re-read that sentence before you say anything. Think. Ah....do you see it? Well, if you don't, there's not much I can do to help you. However, the only rational conclusion: the TEA party has moved the entire discussion, issue by issue, significantly to the right. Hence, they have won. Want an example? We are now talking about when the Keystone pipeline will be approved, not whether. If this is 2008, that's a DOA topic. No way it even gets evaluated seriously. There are a myriad of issues where the "zero point" has been moved significantly to the right, and, where issues that progressives want to talk about, are dead, while issues that are on the TEA party's list, WILL be spoken to by all. If that's not a win, I don't know what is. The national discourse has been moved vastly to the right, and Obama et al have been rendered powerless to stop it. That's the TEA party...winning. Meanwhile, the unmitigated morons like wawrow and yourself sit here, and haven't even realized what is happening. That's because you don't see things clearly. You'd rather wrap yourself in the MSNBC security blanket, and be Baghdad Bobbed to sleep every night. Well, as I said: that's your choice. But, neither of you understand the impact that the TEA party has ALREADY had, so, there's little chance you'll understand things going forward. EDIT: Here's my prediction for when you will finally understand the TEA party's success: when Hillary comes out with her campaign talking points. That's when you'll suddenly realize just how F'ed you and the progressive(socialist) agenda truly are. it's moved republican discourse to the right. and republicans can't even consider a moderate stance in most primaries. i contend romney would have had a better chance if he was allowed to wear his own true face which is moderate. yup, the tea party was largely responsible for his chameleon act. he appeared dishonest in his tea party costume. in this reign of tea party power, dems passed the aca, likely the most ambitious new progressive initiative since civil rights. the early effects of the changes to that will cause dems in upcoming elections to tone it more moderate, no doubt. but don't conclude that's a consequence of the tea party. single payer wasn't getting through the establishment repugs either. this was the level of reform that was feasible. it was a huge risk and many now question it's wisdom. but there is still plenty of time before the next election. we'll see... Edited February 2, 2014 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 You continue to be an ass. Romney got beat by a better ground game. He certainly didn't get beat by a better candidate. Why are you connecting Sarah Palin with Mitt Romney? Answer me this. Should there be a minimum wage for physicians? Maybe there should be a maximum wage for physicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 it's moved republican discourse to the right. and republicans can't even consider a moderate stance in most primaries. i contend romney would have had a better chance if he was allowed to wear his own true face which is moderate. yup, the tea party was largely responsible for his chameleon act. he appeared dishonest in his tea party costume. You continue to push the same falsehood, as if (by repetition) it will be accepted. Romney ran as Romney. He didn't switch his established positions to try and win "tea party" votes. While losing the General Election, Romney actually won independents and moderates by 5 points...............that doesn't fit your narrative, so feel free to ignore it. Many Conservatives stayed home because, (again) the GOP ran a moderate and disappointed their base. Remember bd, the multiple Taxed Enough Already parties around the country are still strong, and will continue to influence the direction of the country . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 You continue to push the same falsehood, as if (by repetition) it will be accepted. Romney ran as Romney. He didn't switch his established positions to try and win "tea party" votes. While losing the General Election, Romney actually won independents and moderates by 5 points...............that doesn't fit your narrative, so feel free to ignore it. Many Conservatives stayed home because, (again) the GOP ran a moderate and disappointed their base. Remember bd, the multiple Taxed Enough Already parties around the country are still strong, and will continue to influence the direction of the country . he lost by nearly 4%. i'm not getting your arithmetic. there are only so many angry, white men voters. you can define moderate and independent however you like. it's the actual voter demographics that matter and romney's were pretty white bread. besides, it's the electoral votes that matter and they weren't even remotely close. and i'm more confused than ever about where "mainstream" republicans stand. is ann coulter agreeing with you or me on this issue? http://www.thedailyb...servatives.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 he appeared dishonest in his tea party costume. in this reign of tea party power, dems passed the aca, likely the most ambitious new progressive initiative since civil rights. the early effects of the changes to that will cause dems in upcoming elections to tone it more moderate, no doubt. but don't conclude that's a consequence of the tea party. single payer wasn't getting through the establishment repugs either. this was the level of reform that was feasible. it was a huge risk and many now question it's wisdom. but there is still plenty of time before the next election. we'll see... It's almost like you're making things up to help you feel better. Two things known by virtually ANYONE watching the last two presidential elections. 1) The closest MItt Romney came to wearing a "tea party constume" was picking Paul Ryan, and that was strictly from a fiscal conservative standpoint and nothing else. Beyond that, Mitt in a tea party costume is some make-believe world of yours that simply never, ever existed. The Obama team out-hustled the Romney team on the ground...period. 2) The ACA was not passed in any 'reign of tea party power.' The Tea Party gatherings were never part of the scene until Obama decided that the way out of the recession was to take a trillion dollars and pay off his election supporters under the name of a "stimulus." The first sign of any Tea Party power came in the form of Scott Brown in an effort to stop ACA, and it didn't happen. So no, ACA was not passed in the reign of any power beyond Rahm Emmanuel getting control of the WH, House and Senate with blue dog Dems who were forced by the WH to eat their own to get ACA through. I'll give you the words I gave to gatorman...think first, then post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts