Langston Hughes Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 You were talking about the RNC. No, I was talking about the Tea Party, the crazy intolerant wing of the RNC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share Posted February 2, 2014 No, I was talking about the Tea Party, the crazy intolerant wing of the RNC. My bad. I got disoriented from jumping into several threads and other browsing on my phone. I disagree with you characterization of the TEA Party. Take a look at your own "crazy, intolerant wing of the DNC".....MSNBC. TEA Party, per se, may not be THE talk of the town, but those who got involved and engaged with the Taxed Enough Already movement are/will still be an influence in 2014/2016. They didn't go away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 the Tea Party is waning, not waxing. It made it's statement in 2010 and is mostly damaging the the future of the republican/conservative movement. Keep believing what they tell you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 No, I was talking about the Tea Party, the crazy intolerant wing of the RNC. Is that what they program in to your head about them? Maybe you could enlighten us to what is "crazy intolerant" about them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Maybe you could enlighten us to what is "crazy intolerant" about them? Just watch the Koch-suckers on FOX . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Just watch the Koch-suckers on FOX . . . That's it? So you don't have anything to say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Just watch the Koch-suckers on FOX . . . Is that all you got? Please answer the question. I would like to know what is crazy about the tea party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) I am curious where the TP fits into current political climate. - Democrats are still trying to recover from the ACA disaster rollout. Obama makes a bad political play threatening executive orders. - Republicans (the party of no) are suddenly preaching the mantra of compromise (the party of maybe during election years?) - Nearly every poll has indicated that public support for the TP is waning and their numbers have reduced. Where do they position themselves now? Another debt-ceiling showdown would be more disastrous than the last for them. How do they sell themselves to a populace tiring of extremism and gridlock? BTW, Fox News is just like MSNBC. Treat them like the entertainment networks they are and you are gold. Treat them like valid informative sources for breaking news and events and boy are you in trouble Edited February 2, 2014 by the_spaniard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 BTW, Fox News is just like MSNBC. Except Fox kicks their ass in the ratings....so the majority of viewers don't hold the same opinion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 I am curious where the TP fits into current political climate. - Democrats are still trying to recover from the ACA disaster rollout. Obama makes a bad political play threatening executive orders. - Republicans (the party of no) are suddenly preaching the mantra of compromise (the party of maybe during election years?) - Nearly every poll has indicated that public support for the TP is waning and their numbers have reduced. Where do they position themselves now? Another debt-ceiling showdown would be more disastrous than the last for them. How do they sell themselves to a populace tiring of extremism and gridlock? BTW, Fox News is just like MSNBC. Treat them like the entertainment networks they are and you are gold. Treat them like valid informative sources for breaking news and events and boy are you in trouble Even with the polls it's how you ask the question. I guess I need to explain the Tea Party I'm talking about, it's the Ron Paul group I'm talking about. He was the father of it in December of 2007. The Republicans after trying to bash it and it not working decided to infiltrate it and take it over I would say. That is when it became a name in the MSM but it still wasn't the real one. I have followed him since the beginning and the people he endorses and campaigns for are not the ones you hear about in the MSM. I guess to the average Joe it is very blurry but I follow the real source and have a good idea of what's going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Except Fox kicks their ass in the ratings....so the majority of viewers don't hold the same opinion... So? Conservatives all like the same shit. Big deal. I find it funny that recent polls show that conservatives, like you, hate MSNBC more than Liberals even like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Is that what they program in to your head about them? Maybe you could enlighten us to what is "crazy intolerant" about them? You mean what the Tea party demonstrates that proves it? Their is a laundry list of things, do you really want me to post them all AGAIN? 1. I'm going to start with the Gold standard people. You are one of them, and no matter how much evidence there is that we should not return to a gold standard, they are still out in the Tea Baggers. http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_cw1nNUYOXSAKwrq Transitioning Back to the Gold Standard Getting back to a gold standard would not be easy. The fundamental problem is that, at the current price of gold, the Federal Reserve does not have enough gold to back all the dollars. However, even though there are challenges to overcome, there are definitely solutions to get the US back on a gold standard. Congressman Ron Paul has been championing a return to the gold standard and, as evidenced by his 1985 paper, his approach to going back to a gold standard is based heavily on the writings of Ludwig von Mises.[9] 2, The candidates and officials that send strange correspondence, if you could openly racist emails that. "Carl Paladino has forwarded close friends hundreds of email messages he received," he said. "Many of these emails he received were off color, some were politically incorrect, few represented his own opinion, and almost none of them were worth remembering." A Tea Party darling, Paladino reportedly sent an e-mail depicting a horse having sex with a woman and another that included a pornographic video and the headline "Miss France 2008 F[***]ing." He also reportedly sent out an e-mail depicting President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama as a pimp and prostitute and one showing an airplane landing near black men with the caption "Holy Sh*t. run ni**ers, run!" Should i continue or can we just go with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 You mean what the Tea party demonstrates that proves it? Their is a laundry list of things, do you really want me to post them all AGAIN? 1. I'm going to start with the Gold standard people. You are one of them, and no matter how much evidence there is that we should not return to a gold standard, they are still out in the Tea Baggers. http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_cw1nNUYOXSAKwrq 2, The candidates and officials that send strange correspondence, if you could openly racist emails that. Should i continue or can we just go with that? 2. Who the hell is that? Someone you or that rag just labeled Tea Party? Never heard of him. Seems his history was a Dem till 2005 then switched to Repub. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 3, 2014 Author Share Posted February 3, 2014 2. Who the hell is that? Someone you or that rag just labeled Tea Party? Never heard of him. Seems his history was a Dem till 2005 then switched to Repub. Rat abandoned the sinking ship to take advantage of the political candidacy opportunity against a (former fellow) democrat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 ....... hate MSNBC more than Liberals even like it. "Inquiring minds want to know" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) Except Fox kicks their ass in the ratings....so the majority of viewers don't hold the same opinion... And Honey Boo-Boo was the best show on cable television, the Camry is better car than anything the domestics make, and Michael Bay movies are the best because millions of people see those Transformer movies....see where I am going with this? Having a large majority is meaningless. It has nothing to do with the fact they are as factually challenged and biased in their reporting as MSNBC. Edited February 4, 2014 by the_spaniard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) Even with the polls it's how you ask the question. I guess I need to explain the Tea Party I'm talking about, it's the Ron Paul group I'm talking about. He was the father of it in December of 2007. The Republicans after trying to bash it and it not working decided to infiltrate it and take it over I would say. That is when it became a name in the MSM but it still wasn't the real one. I have followed him since the beginning and the people he endorses and campaigns for are not the ones you hear about in the MSM. I guess to the average Joe it is very blurry but I follow the real source and have a good idea of what's going on. I guess my question stands. If there are two factions (the Paul one) and the MSM one (showcased by ultra-conservative media magnets like Palin, Perry and Cruz) how do you differentiate? How does the public know? I would think anyone interested in credibility would consider Cruz and Palin radioactive. Perry is just ultra-conservative. How does the Paul faction distance themselves from that? Rand Paul has received a ringing endorsement from Palin, which surely can't help. There are many people (like myself) that wouldn't mind a third party push, but feels that if Palin is involved then the movement has lost all credibility. How do you sell the TP to independents with people like Palin, Perry and Cruz are spotlight representatives in the eye of the media? The TP (in whatever incarnation) needs to be bipartisan in support. Where is the liberal counterbalance to arguably one of the most staunch ultra-conservatives in Perry? Edited February 4, 2014 by the_spaniard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 And Honey Boo-Boo was the best show on cable television, the Camry is better car than anything the domestics make, and Michael Bay movies are the best because millions of people see those Transformer movies....see where I am going with this? Having a large majority is meaningless. It has nothing to do with the fact they are as factually challenged and biased in their reporting as MSNBC. This is always the come back from liberals.....there's a reason that Fox is so successful and conservative talk radio leads all others....oh and honey boo boo is not the #1 show on cable...maybe it's #1 with you...you're just in denial... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I guess my question stands. If there are two factions (the Paul one) and the MSM one (showcased by ultra-conservative media magnets like Palin, Perry and Cruz) how do you differentiate? How does the public know? I would think anyone interested in credibility would consider Cruz and Palin radioactive. Perry is just ultra-conservative. How does the Paul faction distance themselves from that? Rand Paul has received a ringing endorsement from Palin, which surely can't help. I guess you might want to say 3. You have all the old RINOs like McCain. The public needs to do there homework and see who these people really are. I know that's a far reach but ultimately for the good of all of us it needs to be done. You can't stop someone from endorsing someone. What if Bush, who is hated by the Dems, endorsed Clinton? That wouldn't help either. I'd say since 2007 there are many more people paying attention and it's trending upwards. There are many people (like myself) that wouldn't mind a third party push, but feels that if Palin is involved then the movement has lost all credibility. How do you sell the TP to independents with people like Palin, Perry and Cruz are spotlight representatives in the eye of the media? There are "crazy extremists" in all groups. When Paul Sr. ran both times there were some "let's overthrow the government" crazies backing him. I thought, who cares no matter what we are all free. They can think what they want and do what they want as long as they don't harm others. He didn't agree with what they felt and stood for but in the end what he stands for wouldn't let him consider them "radioactive" just because one group or MSM does. There was no harm done unto others from them so they are free to believe what they want. The TP (in whatever incarnation) needs to be bipartisan in support. Where is the liberal counterbalance to arguably one of the most staunch ultra-conservatives in Perry? I don't pay attention to the 2 party poison much anymore. Just look up Ron Pauls voting record. He has sided with the Dems and Repubs many times. He has also stood out by himself many times, being the only no vote on a bill that ends up being something all of us don't like That bipartisan shit is also garbage. Who are they but independent private organizations? Bi means 2, there is only one Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 This is always the come back from liberals.....there's a reason that Fox is so successful and conservative talk radio leads all others.... It's because they like to be told what to think. :happy feet: I find it ironic that so many conservatives here express distrust of a true democracy, and yet turn around and suggest that Fox is good because it has more of the masses enthralled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 It's because they like to be told what to think. :happy feet: I find it ironic that so many conservatives here express distrust of a true democracy, and yet turn around and suggest that Fox is good because it has more of the masses enthralled. Shall we parse that statement? (I find it ironic that) Irrelevant (so many conservatives here express distrust of a true democracy), A true democracy is a mob. Are you advocating the wolves decide if they have sheep for dinner? (and yet turn around and suggest that Fox is good because it has more of the masses enthralled.) Fox does not have the power of the government. And Fox has viewers who are drawn to the network because they are of like mind. Not because they want to be told what to think. It relates to "clans" (not Klans, so don't bother to go there). People are drawn to gather in groups like themselves, basically because similar people would have similar goals and common interests. As a family does. And coming together for common reasons is survival instincts. If early mankind had started hiding in bear caves, there'd be no mankind here today. Neanderthals were not the friend of Homo Sapiens, with few exceptions. It was a battle of species, and grouping by species led to our survival. So goes the attraction to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, FoxNews, etc.....the audience is drawn to the sound of a common mindset, not like zombies looking for their instructions. And the same can/should be said for the "Stephanie Miller", "The Ed Show", "Air America", "MSNBC", et al. audiences. Similar minds gather together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) Jesus, that was a busload of shit. But I'm on your side here, you've convinced me that you must be right, conservatives gather together solely out of the herd instinct and not out of sentience. I'm forever grateful that you showed me the truth. Edited February 4, 2014 by Langston Hughes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) It's because they like to be told what to think. :happy feet: I find it ironic that so many conservatives here express distrust of a true democracy, and yet turn around and suggest that Fox is good because it has more of the masses enthralled. Pay a visit to just about any university in the country and then try selling that shit. Our universities are polluted with flat out communist marxist or at the very least hardcore socialist professors who not only don't trust democracy, they despise it. In true liberal fashion they proclaim that they are the vanguard of freedom and equality when in reality they are anything but. This, however, is not surprising. Castro proclaimed himself a liberator and a believer in democratic rule. Chavez did the same as did Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, even Hitler. Liberals are no different. They run around and preach about how all they want is equality for the little guy and how they are going to make everything fair and equal for everyone. They want nothing of the sort. The real enemy of the masses is the two faces of liberalism, not Fox news. Edited February 5, 2014 by BlackHorse 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Pay a visit to just about any university in the country and then try selling that shit. Our universities are polluted with flat out communist marxist or at the very least hardcore socialist professors who not only don't trust democracy, they despise it. In true liberal fashion they proclaim that they are the vanguard of freedom and equality when in reality they are anything but. This, however, is not surprising. Castro proclaimed himself a liberator and a believer in democratic rule. Chavez did the same as did Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, even Hitler. Liberals are no different. They run around and preach about how all they want is equality for the little guy and how they are going to make everything fair and equal for everyone. They want nothing of the sort. The real enemy of the masses is the two faces of liberalism, not Fox news. You are funny. Not in a good sort of way but in a goofy way that makes reading your little tirades interesting. While i have no doubt that you see communist marxist everywhere, whatever that is, my point wasn't pertaining to the grand field of all those people out there somewhere. My point was that conservatives HERE, in this forum have railed against democracy only to then turn around and suggest that the choices of the masses in regards to Fox news meant something. By the way, I know it means alot to you that potential dictators use terms like liberators and shit, but whether it's a pro-American dictator or anti-American dictator I give their little word games zero fucks. It might work better if you did too. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 My point was that conservatives HERE, in this forum have railed against democracy only to then turn around and suggest that the choices of the masses in regards to Fox news meant something. Democracy, as a form of government, is dangerous and is the wolves vs. the sheep. Which is fine as long as you're a wolf and outnumber the sheep. But, the popularity and ratings of tv program is apples to oranges compared to democracy in government. 5 out of 6 want to watch a particular program on the only tv available in the house? That's just practical. 5 out of 6 want to rape the 6th? Not quite the same. Try again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.