Have I missed it? Where is the talk of McCain destroying the "Real Conservative"?

Dixie said:
What the fuck is that supposed to mean? You talk like the Tea Party is an official party competing on the ballot, and it's not. There isn't some Big Board somewhere, with all the Tea Party camp huddled around, watching to see if "their candidate" will win on election night. The group has a diverse cross-section of 'local' opinions and political sentiments, and doesn't necessarily walk in lockstep together, in spite of what sort of stereotypes you've developed for "the Tea Party" in general.

It gets me how people act like (with the reporting) the Tea Party is going around stamping politicians on the ass with a Tea Party Seal of Approval! Then they go around showing off their ass, saying... seeeee... Tea Party Approved Baby! Vote for ME! LOL... it's just insane.

Certainly, there are candidates who appeal to a large percentage of Tea Party supporters, but people all have assorted and varied reasons and justifications for their vote. The Tea Party is not 'brainwashing' people into who to vote for! That's what DEMOCRATS do! That's what REPUBLICANS do! That's even what LIBERTARIANS do! The general idea, is to get people involved, get them off their couch and researching their candidates, and finding quality people they want to be their representatives in Washington. It's as simple as that, not some far-fetched concerted effort to elect a cabal of 'extremist nuts' to go sweep Congress with some right-wing radical mandate. I know that's how Katie Couric sees it, and Rachel Madcow, but really, that's not what the Tea Party is about at all.
Click to expand...

The Tea Party either exists or it doesn't.
 
Threedee said:
The Tea Party either exists or it doesn't.
Click to expand...

It exists, just not in the way liberal elites think it exists. As I said, it is more of a general ideology (core conservatism) and takes different shapes regionally. It's not a single identifiable entity... not just a bunch of ignorant rednecks clinging to their guns and bibles... not just a bunch of right wing fanatics... not even an organized coalition really, just an idea and philosophy. Many voters will support the Tea Party candidate, but never admit to a pollster or whatever, that they are part of "The Tea Party".

In waging all-out war on "The Tea Party", the left has failed to understand the complexity of the problem, it's not the organization they should fear and attack, it does absolutely no good whatsoever. The ideology and philosophy has to be countered, and the left has failed to do that, opting to continue throwing stones at the "group" which doesn't really exist, at least, not in the traditional sense in which they believe it does.
 
Dixie said:
It exists, just not in the way liberal elites think it exists. As I said, it is more of a general ideology (core conservatism) and takes different shapes regionally. It's not a single identifiable entity... not just a bunch of ignorant rednecks clinging to their guns and bibles... not just a bunch of right wing fanatics... not even an organized coalition really, just an idea and philosophy. Many voters will support the Tea Party candidate, but never admit to a pollster or whatever, that they are part of "The Tea Party".

In waging all-out war on "The Tea Party", the left has failed to understand the complexity of the problem, it's not the organization they should fear and attack, it does absolutely no good whatsoever. The ideology and philosophy has to be countered, and the left has failed to do that, opting to continue throwing stones at the "group" which doesn't really exist, at least, not in the traditional sense in which they believe it does.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to say that Didier and Akers ran as TP. They ran as Republicans, along with Rossi, but Washington tea partiers decided Rossi wasn't the right choice for conservatives and supported those two.

The fact is, liberals can't really do anything to hurt the Tea Party, because its going to win in places where the GOP can afford to back them (such as in Kentucky with Rand Paul), and its going to lose in places like Washington where the GOP can't defeat Patty Murray without a more far reaching and popular candidate such as Rossi, who won the popular vote in the 2004 governor's race, and won endorcements from organizations that had never backed Republicans before, and cross-party support from Dinocrats.
 
I'm not familiar enough with WA politics to comment. I am merely talking about the perceptions of the "Tea Party" and how I believe they have been misconstrued. I think it is the word "party" in the name, it gives the impression this is a "political party" and it's not. It's a movement.

Think about the Civil Rights movement of the 60s... how funny it would sound in retrospect, claiming the CR "party" does well in this part of the country, but not so well over here... it was a movement, a collective coming together of a philosophy and principle, by a large cross-section of society, which may not have agreed on a good many other issues, but stood united on this one.

The critical error made by the left, is dealing with this movement as if it's a political party, and failing to offer a counter to the ideological principles behind the movement.
 
Threedee said:
I didn't mean to say that Didier and Akers ran as TP. They ran as Republicans, along with Rossi, but Washington tea partiers decided Rossi wasn't the right choice for conservatives and supported those two.

The fact is, liberals can't really do anything to hurt the Tea Party, because its going to win in places where the GOP can afford to back them (such as in Kentucky with Rand Paul), and its going to lose in places like Washington where the GOP can't defeat Patty Murray without a more far reaching and popular candidate such as Rossi, who won the popular vote in the 2004 governor's race, and won endorcements from organizations that had never backed Republicans before, and cross-party support from Dinocrats.
Click to expand...

I personally know of about 20 TEA party folks (just our own small enclave) but there must certainly have been others, who support Rossi, always have. That's the thing with the TEA Party; there is a freedom to educate yourself based on small government principles and vote accordingly!
 
Dixie said:
:gives: :cof1:


----------------------------------------------------------

When you engage your brain and examine the McCain/Heyworth race, it is very interesting what happened, and it demonstrates the power of the Tea Party movement. In order for the perennial favorite.. the most popular republican in America, the hero, the Maverick... John McCain, to win the election, he had to 'fundamentally transform' himself rather dramatically. He began to speak on the importance to seal our borders, as well as other conservative issues he was previously 'mavericky' on. Suddenly, McCain seems to have gotten it... we'll have to wait and see. But he really had to change his tune a bit, and become more conservative.

What is really funny is how out of touch with reality the liberals seem to be over this. ..Welp, McCain won, guess that means the tea party's over, huh, huh?
LMFAO.... dontchya wish?
Click to expand...

I have to wonder if the Cirque du Soliel ever offered you a gig because you are without a doubt one of the most incredible CONTORTIONISTS I have ever seen.

The way you can twist facts to suit your bullshit is amazing!

So, the Tea Party dumped their poster boy Hayworth for McCain because McCain flip flopped on some subject AGAIN?!?

A pity Tea Party supporters are so shallow they will vote for a guy who is such a vote whore he is willing to change his fundamental position on many issues.

Nice to see Tea Party supporters are just the same old opportunistic pigs the GOP usually spits out at election time.
 
Dixie said:
Well that's why we have Obama as president now... THANKS FOR THAT!
Click to expand...

No! The reason you have Obama is because the Republican Party has set itself against many voters.

If they don't start adopting Libertarian ideas, which is a lot of what they say, but the opposite of what they do, you can expect more Obamas.

And what's this unpatriotic act, EPA, support for global warming legislation, our prisons are full of non violent offenders, and an endless amount of other positions that really turn small gov't minded people off? You watch, when they take back control, nothing meaningful is going to happen. We'll have a bigger police state at the expense of our liberties. Just like usual.

The republican party is hated for good reason, and if they get back control of congress and screw it up again, you can expect bad things again.
 
Liberty said:
No! The reason you have Obama is because the Republican Party has set itself against many voters.

If they don't start adopting Libertarian ideas, which is a lot of what they say, but the opposite of what they do, you can expect more Obamas.

And what's this unpatriotic act, EPA, support for global warming legislation, our prisons are full of non violent offenders, and an endless amount of other positions that really turn small gov't minded people off? You watch, when they take back control, nothing meaningful is going to happen. We'll have a bigger police state at the expense of our liberties. Just like usual.

The republican party is hated for good reason, and if they get back control of congress and screw it up again, you can expect bad things again.
Click to expand...

I understand that view, but I think its wrong-headed.

The Obama government has swept in unprecedented spending. Now it will take much work to try and slow that down. A two party government will always mean some pragmatic voting within congress...to what end is the bigger question. The best way to slow government growth is equal shares of power between the parties and some serious reform candidates who want to eliminate the power congress gives itself.

McCain would NOT have done what Obama has done; which is to grow government at the fastest rate ever in history.

I agree that republican's in congress took our party for granted and acted the moderate whores to our fiscal detriment. The Patriot Act is another example of government idiocy. GWB should have instead rounded up and deported all ME peoples not already citizens of our nation after 9/11 instead, with an indefinite re-opening of our borders!

That would have been constitutionally lawful and saved us from intrusion into our privacy and freedom!!! Of course there is no way that would have flown, but it would have been the correct path to protect us.
 
Last edited:
Ice Dancer said:
I understand that view, but I think its wrong-headed.

The Obama government has swept in unprecedented spending. Now it will take much work to try and slow that down. A two party government will always mean some pragmatic voting within congress...to what end is the bigger question. The best way to slow government growth is equal shares of power between the parties and some serious reform candidates who want to eliminate the power congress gives itself.

McCain would NOT have done what Obama has done; which is to grow government at the fastest rate ever in history.

I agree that republican's in congress took our party for granted and acted the moderate whores to our fiscal detriment. The Patriot Act is another example of government idiocy. GWB should have instead rounded up and deported all ME peoples not already citizens of our nation after 9/11 instead, with an indefinite re-opening of our borders!

That would have been constitutionally lawful and saved us from intrusion into our privacy and freedom!!! Of course there is no way that would have flown, but it would have been the correct path to protect us.
Click to expand...

I agree, but the system sucks when people show their support for someone like McCain when they hate his guts.
 
Liberty said:
I agree, but the system sucks when people show their support for someone like McCain when they hate his guts.
Click to expand...

I supported McCain in the general election because he had some principled ideas I agreed with and a record I could evaluate. He voted to cap congressional salaries and to limit their terms. Imagine, he himself would be out of a job, but so would all the other multiple term members. The point being is that he does fight for internal reforms to congress and that's VERY important to me.
 
Ice Dancer said:
I supported McCain in the general election because he had some principled ideas I agreed with and a record I could evaluate. He voted to cap congressional salaries and to limit their terms. Imagine, he himself would be out of a job, but so would all the other multiple term members. The point being is that he does fight for internal reforms to congress and that's VERY important to me.
Click to expand...

I know all those points. It's the bad ones I have a problem with.
 
Liberty said:
I agree, but the system sucks when people show their support for someone like McCain when they hate his guts.
Click to expand...

Let's be clear, I don't hate anyone's guts. Not even Obama. I think McCain was misguided on CFR, his idea for amnesty, and some other "moderate" positions he has taken as a "maverick" in his party, but I also think there is a lot of common sense in his thinking. I know he doesn't support the Socialization of America, that the current regime is undertaking. He might slip off the reservation now and then, but he is no Communist Marxist like Obama and the Democrats.

You allow your 'idealism' to thwart your common sense pragmatism. You should be looking at how you can best make your ideological principles a reality, and realizing it's certainly not going to be through Marxist Socialism, the road we're currently traveling down. Until we can come together on some basic fundamentals for smaller limited government, it doesn't matter, the left has a coalition of moochers and thieves, and will vote in lockstep. Your "principles" are resulting in the slow death of your country.
 
Dixie said:
Let's be clear, I don't hate anyone's guts. Not even Obama. I think McCain was misguided on CFR, his idea for amnesty, and some other "moderate" positions he has taken as a "maverick" in his party, but I also think there is a lot of common sense in his thinking. I know he doesn't support the Socialization of America, that the current regime is undertaking. He might slip off the reservation now and then, but he is no Communist Marxist like Obama and the Democrats.

You allow your 'idealism' to thwart your common sense pragmatism. You should be looking at how you can best make your ideological principles a reality, and realizing it's certainly not going to be through Marxist Socialism, the road we're currently traveling down. Until we can come together on some basic fundamentals for smaller limited government, it doesn't matter, the left has a coalition of moochers and thieves, and will vote in lockstep. Your "principles" are resulting in the slow death of your country.
Click to expand...

Your lack of "principles" (and people like you) are why we're in the state we're in.
 
I guess the confusing thing is that the movement's name include's the word "party." For the sake of clarity, we could simply call it the tea movement.
 
Liberty said:
Your lack of "principles" (and people like you) are why we're in the state we're in.
Click to expand...

Not really, my principles are pretty much in line with our Founding principles. We've certainly not remained true to those principles, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about here. I think you're just yammering like the goofball libertarian you really are, and don't know what the fuck you're saying.

We're currently $2.5 TRILLION MORE in debt than we were, with the Government more ensconced in our lives than ever in our history, and growing literally by the fucking day! And you in all your libertarian idealistic principles, want to sit on your hands and let it continue? Are you insane?

What's weird is, 10 years ago, I was just like you! I believed I had to vote for my idealistic match... the candidate who was most closely aligned to my personal philosophy and ideals. I've come to understand, there are two parties, and one of them are going to control power. Nothing else matters. So pick one and work from there to effect a political change. I stopped chasing my personal philosophy because it is a pointless an useless endeavor. Anyone who has my profound wisdom and fair-minded opinions on the problems and issues of our time, is just rare to find... not too many of us Living Legends left out there! So I have to kind of look at the candidates from the perspective of who they are, what they believe, and is it good or bad for the country. My personal principles and ideals have taken a backseat to what is pragmatic and best for our nation. Why? I guess I love America more than myself, what do you think?
 
Threedee said:
I guess the confusing thing is that the movement's name include's the word "party." For the sake of clarity, we could simply call it the tea movement.
Click to expand...
It stands for Taxed Enough Already, and it is reminiscent of the original Tea Party in Boston Harbor.
 
Dixie said:
Not really, my principles are pretty much in line with our Founding principles. We've certainly not remained true to those principles, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about here. I think you're just yammering like the goofball libertarian you really are, and don't know what the fuck you're saying.

We're currently $2.5 TRILLION MORE in debt than we were, with the Government more ensconced in our lives than ever in our history, and growing literally by the fucking day! And you in all your libertarian idealistic principles, want to sit on your hands and let it continue? Are you insane?

What's weird is, 10 years ago, I was just like you! I believed I had to vote for my idealistic match... the candidate who was most closely aligned to my personal philosophy and ideals. I've come to understand, there are two parties, and one of them are going to control power. Nothing else matters. So pick one and work from there to effect a political change. I stopped chasing my personal philosophy because it is a pointless an useless endeavor. Anyone who has my profound wisdom and fair-minded opinions on the problems and issues of our time, is just rare to find... not too many of us Living Legends left out there! So I have to kind of look at the candidates from the perspective of who they are, what they believe, and is it good or bad for the country. My personal principles and ideals have taken a backseat to what is pragmatic and best for our nation. Why? I guess I love America more than myself, what do you think?
Click to expand...

Hahahaha!

I'll only vote for people that publicly say:
No more income tax
No more war on drugs
No more EPA
NO OBAMACARE
No more federal Reserve to name a few.

I have people to vote for. And I wouldn't throw my support behind an alien political view for anything.

My one vote means more when I vote for Libertarians.

When I vote for Reps, or Dems, my vote becomes worthless. It's the same as giving my approval. I don't approve!

I pick up new voters all the time for the Libertarians. A little here, a little there. People that don't vote, but now do. The Republicans better take note and become more Libertarian minded in action, or they'll start losing in more and more races.

And don't give me this "my principles are pretty much in line with our founding principles" crap. The Republicans are nothing more than big (police state) gov't. Much different than any founding principles you claim to have.

Do us all a favor, and call your reps and demand that they reverse their past deeds.

Oh, and I'll vote for any republican that sounds and acts like a true small gov't politician. As of this moment they have a chance, but if history holds true, they're not going to really do a damn thing.
 
AssHatZombie said:
John McCain is a joke. Why is anybody voting for this lying p.o.s. he was point man on bush's amnesty plan. He's a proven liar. why are people voting for him?
Click to expand...

Because he's now trying to distance himself from his record as a "maverick", re-invent as a hard-line conservative, and the idiots are buying into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top