Tea Party Sustainability

Mott the Hoople said:
You're deluding your self. If Repubulicans nominate a hard right candidate, like Hucakbee, or one of questionable qualifications, like Palin, Obama will hand Republicans their ass. The question is can a competant and qualified Republican who is not out there on the lunatic fringe get the Republican nomination? The only candidate I see that they have who can beat Obama at this stage is Romney. I seriously doubt that Romney will play well out in mouth breather land, though I think he'd make an excellent candidate.
Click to expand...

Look who is delusional. Huckabee is hardly hard right. Where do you come up with this fluff?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You're deluding your self. If Repubulicans nominate a hard right candidate, like Hucakbee, or one of questionable qualifications, like Palin, Obama will hand Republicans their ass. The question is can a competant and qualified Republican who is not out there on the lunatic fringe get the Republican nomination? The only candidate I see that they have who can beat Obama at this stage is Romney. I seriously doubt that Romney will play well out in mouth breather land, though I think he'd make an excellent candidate.
Click to expand...

did you fail to see the 'extreme' tea party candidates roust the democrats?
 
Damocles said:
No. I wouldn't. Now, had his past policies been about fiscal conservatism rather than populism you might have a point. Or if he believed in smaller government even when it came to his populist stances. Neither of those are the case. Huckabee isn't "hard right" by any stretch of the imagination.
Click to expand...

Well maybe you wouldn't but I would consider a person who opposes first trimester abortions in cases of rape and incest, hard right.

I'd say opposing medical marijauna is hard right.

I'd say supporting displays of the 10 commandments in public schools is hard right.

I'd say supporting the teaching of creationism in science class is hard right.

I'd say opposing embryonic stem cell research is hard right.

I'd say his opposition to anti pollution laws in his own state is hard right.

I'd say his suggestion to quarentine AIDS patients is hard right.

I'd say his support of illegal immigrants as a sourch of cheap labor that under cuts wages is hard right.

I'd say his comment "I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk" is a hard right position.

I'd say suggesting that we increase an all ready bloated military by 50% is hard right position.

I'd say that supporting regressive tax schemes, such as the "Fair Tax", which places the burden of taxation on the middle and working classes is a hard right position.

I'd say that wanting to eliminate the IRS and the Dept of Education are very hard right positions.

I'd say his support of Bush's immoral war in Iraq and his comments that "opposition to the war in Iraq is dangerous" is extremely hard right.

I'd say his stance on using military force on Iran is not only hard right but down right scary.

I'd say his position that the US must defend Israel because it was promised to the Jews by God is not only hard right but it is insane.

I'd say that his position that Palestinians do not have a place in Jeruselum when they have been living there for over a thousand years is not only hard right, it's down right inhuman.

I'd say his comments to ammend the US Constitution to meet God's laws is not only hard right but is the sign of a religious zealot and a fanatic.

Based on those public positions I'd have to say only someone who is hard right themself can make an asinine comment about Huckabee being just a religious populist.
 
Beefy said:
Back in 2008, Ron Paul launched his "Tea Party" fundraiser and raised more than any other candidate in in the whole race for a single day.

The Tea Party is born.

The housing market bubbles. Major financial institutions collapse. Bush and his minions rush through TARP. Tea party remains waits until a Democrat takes office to care.

Obama wins an easy race against and old, grumpy, cranky fart that made the GOP's selection of '96 look like a spring chicken. Sarah Palin emerges as a hero.

Obama takes office.

The economy is a piece of shit, Obama and congress rain another $750+billion on the parade.

The economy continues to suck.

Tea Party gets pissed off and throws out the garbage. Its a success. Many incumbents are voted out of the general, new blood is put in. A big "Fuck you!" to congress. And indeed, if any institution needed a "Fuck You!", it was congress.

So now, we have all these new guys in office. This fresh blood. And now the activists cant get together anymore.

The fiscal conservative libertarian minded are being affronted by the fiscal conservative religious fanatics who think Jesus likes to torture people, and common ground on the only non-fantasy issue they have in common is lost.

I see this thing fragmenting by the next congressional election in 2 years, and going the way of Perot's "Reform" party by 2014.

Mark my words.
Click to expand...

They 'kicked off' their first convention with a racist xenophobic rant and then they squeal 'we are being mislabeled'.


“If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.”
Douglas Adams
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well maybe you wouldn't but I would consider a person who opposes first trimester abortions in cases of rape and incest, hard right.

I'd say opposing medical marijauna is hard right.

I'd say supporting displays of the 10 commandments in public schools is hard right.

I'd say supporting the teaching of creationism in science class is hard right.

I'd say opposing embryonic stem cell research is hard right.

I'd say his opposition to anti pollution laws in his own state is hard right.

I'd say his suggestion to quarentine AIDS patients is hard right.

I'd say his support of illegal immigrants as a sourch of cheap labor that under cuts wages is hard right.

I'd say his comment "I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk" is a hard right position.

I'd say suggesting that we increase an all ready bloated military by 50% is hard right position.

I'd say that supporting regressive tax schemes, such as the "Fair Tax", which places the burden of taxation on the middle and working classes is a hard right position.

I'd say that wanting to eliminate the IRS and the Dept of Education are very hard right positions.

I'd say his support of Bush's immoral war in Iraq and his comments that "opposition to the war in Iraq is dangerous" is extremely hard right.

I'd say his stance on using military force on Iran is not only hard right but down right scary.

I'd say his position that the US must defend Israel because it was promised to the Jews by God is not only hard right but it is insane.

I'd say that his position that Palestinians do not have a place in Jeruselum when they have been living there for over a thousand years is not only hard right, it's down right inhuman.

I'd say his comments to ammend the US Constitution to meet God's laws is not only hard right but is the sign of a religious zealot and a fanatic.

Based on those public positions I'd have to say only someone who is hard right themself can make an asinine comment about Huckabee being just a religious populist.
Click to expand...
I'd say most of those are religious radicalism and not "hard right", most aren't even conservative stances as there is nothing they work to preserve, they seek only to push religion.

I think you confuse religion and "right" and wonder why you don't have a better understanding than this.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No, the fact that a man would force science educators to teach religion in science class rooms instead of established science makes them hard right.
Click to expand...

No, that makes him a religious radical, not "hard right"... Conservatives would preserve the status quo, not seek to to push something that isn't there currently. It is a complete twist of what "right" or "conservatism" is about to suggest that because somebody is a religious radical they are "conservative".
 
Damocles said:
No, that makes him a religious radical, not "hard right"... Conservatives would preserve the status quo, not seek to to push something that isn't there currently. It is a complete twist of what "right" or "conservatism" is about to suggest that because somebody is a religious radical they are "conservative".
Click to expand...

You say conservatives preserve the "status quo"...

So we can infer from this statement that you believe real conservatives don't support school choice?
 
Damocles said:
No, that makes him a religious radical, not "hard right"... Conservatives would preserve the status quo, not seek to to push something that isn't there currently. It is a complete twist of what "right" or "conservatism" is about to suggest that because somebody is a religious radical they are "conservative".
Click to expand...

Are we talking about Huckabee still? A "religious radical?" Really, Damo? In the days of Islamic Radicalism, that is a very 'damning' label to apply to a politician. I would say Huck is a Social Conservative, and as much as Libertarian types like Damo want to marginalize them, they represent about 85% of all Conservatives.

You see, what conservatives like Damo lack the understanding of, is how the moral values of social conservatives are the foundation of conservatism, and without it, conservatism fails. It does so, because social liberalism paves the road for all the social liberal arguments that follow in the wake. Social conservatism provides the defense for these mindlessly stupid liberal arguments, and enables advancement of more important conservative fiscal issues. This does not mean that a pure Social Conservative is GREAT... that's what Bush was! From a different perspective, that was also what Carter was! Not FISCAL, but SOCIAL Conservatives. Neither "type" of conservative should ever be pitted against the other, with the perspective that one should be discarded and one kept. The two types are dependent upon each other in fundamental ways, and vital to the success of the conservative message and conservative policy. It is finding a suitable balance and a candidate who can 'join' those two "types" of conservative, in an understanding of the importance of both.
 
Dixie said:
Are we talking about Huckabee still? A "religious radical?" Really, Damo? In the days of Islamic Radicalism, that is a very 'damning' label to apply to a politician. I would say Huck is a Social Conservative, and as much as Libertarian types like Damo want to marginalize them, they represent about 85% of all Conservatives.

You see, what conservatives like Damo lack the understanding of, is how the moral values of social conservatives are the foundation of conservatism, and without it, conservatism fails. It does so, because social liberalism paves the road for all the social liberal arguments that follow in the wake. Social conservatism provides the defense for these mindlessly stupid liberal arguments, and enables advancement of more important conservative fiscal issues. This does not mean that a pure Social Conservative is GREAT... that's what Bush was! From a different perspective, that was also what Carter was! Not FISCAL, but SOCIAL Conservatives. Neither "type" of conservative should ever be pitted against the other, with the perspective that one should be discarded and one kept. The two types are dependent upon each other in fundamental ways, and vital to the success of the conservative message and conservative policy. It is finding a suitable balance and a candidate who can 'join' those two "types" of conservative, in an understanding of the importance of both.
Click to expand...

Can you cite any source showing social conservatives make up 85% of all conservatives?
 
WinterBorn said:
Can you cite any source showing social conservatives make up 85% of all conservatives?
Click to expand...

pea.bmp
 
WinterBorn said:
Can you cite any source showing social conservatives make up 85% of all conservatives?
Click to expand...

Roughly one third, 36%, to 42%[2] of the American public self-identify as "conservative." Conservatives commonly outnumber liberals in the general public with both ideological groupings being outnumbered by centrists.[6] The military-industrial complex in particular remains a conservative bastion.[13][14] A 2003 survey by the Military Times found that the "military considers itself clearly more conservative and Republican." In a December 2006 poll, 46% of active personnel identified as Republican, down from 60% in 2004.[15] In the 2000, 2004 and 2006 elections CNN exit polls found that roughly 80% of self-described conservatives voted Republican.[8][9][10] A study by the Pew Research Center, where research assigned typological classifications based on responses to policy and ideological questions, found that a significant percentage of Democratic voters were social conservatives who only voted for the Democratic party due to their more left-leaning economic methods, as well as their long time affiliation with the party especially among Dixiecrats and blacks. This study divided conservatives into four groups: Enterprisers, Social Conservatives, Pro-Government Conservatives, and Conservative Democrats. Of the conservative groups, Conservative Democrats were the most common typological group comprising 14% of respondents while Enterprisers and Pro-Government Conservatives were the least common among the conservative groups at 9%. Enterprisers had the second highest percentage of college graduates (46%) behind Liberals, and were tied with Liberals percentage wise on those who have household incomes of $75,000 or more (41%), while actually having a higher percentage of people who have household incomes of $50,000 or more (62%). All conservative demographics were religious with less than 10% of respondents identifying as "secular," compared to 22% among liberals.[4]

Political ideologies in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Multi-axis_political_spectrum.svg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Multi-axis_political_spectrum.svg/250px-Multi-axis_political_spectrum.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/a/ae/Multi-axis_political_spectrum.svg/250px-Multi-axis_political_spectrum.svg.png

Now, if you equate Social Conservative with "Religious" Conservative, and I am sure most of you do... then this study bears out what I stated, in fact, it looks like about 90% of Conservatives are Social Conservative.... in the REAL world, not in JPP-land, where pinhead Libertarians dominate the board!
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well maybe you wouldn't but I would consider a person who opposes first trimester abortions in cases of rape and incest, hard right.

I'd say opposing medical marijauna is hard right.

I'd say supporting displays of the 10 commandments in public schools is hard right.

I'd say supporting the teaching of creationism in science class is hard right.

I'd say opposing embryonic stem cell research is hard right.

I'd say his opposition to anti pollution laws in his own state is hard right.

I'd say his suggestion to quarentine AIDS patients is hard right.

I'd say his support of illegal immigrants as a sourch of cheap labor that under cuts wages is hard right.

I'd say his comment "I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk" is a hard right position.

I'd say suggesting that we increase an all ready bloated military by 50% is hard right position.

I'd say that supporting regressive tax schemes, such as the "Fair Tax", which places the burden of taxation on the middle and working classes is a hard right position.

I'd say that wanting to eliminate the IRS and the Dept of Education are very hard right positions.

I'd say his support of Bush's immoral war in Iraq and his comments that "opposition to the war in Iraq is dangerous" is extremely hard right.

I'd say his stance on using military force on Iran is not only hard right but down right scary.

I'd say his position that the US must defend Israel because it was promised to the Jews by God is not only hard right but it is insane.

I'd say that his position that Palestinians do not have a place in Jeruselum when they have been living there for over a thousand years is not only hard right, it's down right inhuman.

I'd say his comments to ammend the US Constitution to meet God's laws is not only hard right but is the sign of a religious zealot and a fanatic.

Based on those public positions I'd have to say only someone who is hard right themself can make an asinine comment about Huckabee being just a religious populist.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ.
Marijuana smoking or shoving it where the sun dont shine is not/should not be a national/federal political issue. Displaying ten commandments or eleven or none is not a national/federal political issue. Stem cell research is not a national/federal political issue and nor are most of the other points. I do not believe that any of them are the exclusive territory of either side of the political spectrum.
I tend to be viewed as left of centre but I cannot agree with gay marriages or unions although I have no problem with people of 'unconventional' views gathering together if it causes no harm or discomfort to the general population.
Immigration matters and the defence of the realm are certainly political issues but, once again are not necessarily the province of one side or the other.
Military spending and matters of foreign policy are certainly political issues and certainly an increase in such is symptomatic of the control of the nation by right wing and often corrupt capitalism.
Once again though, it must be stressed that many Americans have what may be best described as an inaccurate understanding of left and right politics. A result, once again, of the incessant feeding of the masses with capitalist propaganda.
One thing that Wikileaks has done (and not everything released is good) is to expose many of the corrupt and self serving lies that all governments feed to their ignorant populations. If any lives have seriously been put at risk among the powerful elite then it is probably right that they are.
Who will join me in a campaign to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Julian Assange?
 
Dixie said:
Are we talking about Huckabee still? A "religious radical?" Really, Damo? In the days of Islamic Radicalism, that is a very 'damning' label to apply to a politician. I would say Huck is a Social Conservative, and as much as Libertarian types like Damo want to marginalize them, they represent about 85% of all Conservatives.

You see, what conservatives like Damo lack the understanding of, is how the moral values of social conservatives are the foundation of conservatism, and without it, conservatism fails. It does so, because social liberalism paves the road for all the social liberal arguments that follow in the wake. Social conservatism provides the defense for these mindlessly stupid liberal arguments, and enables advancement of more important conservative fiscal issues. This does not mean that a pure Social Conservative is GREAT... that's what Bush was! From a different perspective, that was also what Carter was! Not FISCAL, but SOCIAL Conservatives. Neither "type" of conservative should ever be pitted against the other, with the perspective that one should be discarded and one kept. The two types are dependent upon each other in fundamental ways, and vital to the success of the conservative message and conservative policy. It is finding a suitable balance and a candidate who can 'join' those two "types" of conservative, in an understanding of the importance of both.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

I speak solely in political terms not as in radicalized religion, it is quite doofusie to purposefully misunderstand like this. Radicals, politically, want to change laws rather than preserve the current laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top