| Author | Message | ||
     Fahren |
Just my opinion, but everyone should subscribe to these weekly, 1-page messages. Paul's political message is incredibly clear and consistent. No gimmicks, no flip-flopping. This week's: http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content &view=article&id=1925:taking-executive-orders-too- far&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69 You can argue about whether this sort of clear thinking and action makes him the best prez candidate, if you wish. I just wish there were more clear thinkers in the federal gummint, who, like him, are not beholden to big money interests. | ||
| Blake |
Reassert constitutional limits on our government?  Gee, where've we heard that before?  Not from the OWS people. Could it be the Tea Partiers? Why yes! It was from the Tea Partiers!  Good to finally have you aboard Chris!  | ||
| Fahren |
Blake, I'm no tea partier, and I think you know it (always fun to tease, though ;- ). There are plenty of people who agree with the OWS and the TparT notion that "things are out of control" or "broken." I think there are people who are way off base in both movements, and then there are people who would be more likely to align with one or the other, but who are generally not wack-o nut jobs on the left or right fringe. Your Texas rep, Mr. Paul, does not seem to feel the need to go off and start or join a movement! I absolutely agree with him and you (all) on one thing: the rules (aka the Constitution) are fine the way they were written..... let's just insist on them being followed. | ||
| Sifo |
There are plenty of people who agree with the OWS and the TparT notion that "things are out of control" or "broken." There may be some agreement on the problems. There is virtually no agreement on the solutions. | ||
| Sifo |
Pop quiz!!! Tea Party or Flea party?  | ||
| Fahren |
There may be some agreement on the problems. There is virtually no agreement on the solutions. Welcome to America, Tom! Home of free speech and where we thrive on healthy debate of disputed beliefs! WTF with standing on the 48-star flag, though? Looks like you have found some of those "wack-o's" of whom I spoke. You get no disagreement from me about how actions like that only hurt their cause. | ||
| Sifo |
WTF with standing on the 48-star flag, though? Looks like you have found some of those "wack-o's" of whom I spoke. You get no disagreement from me about how actions like that only hurt their cause. How come the wackos always seem to be on one side? I've never seen a picture even close to this in the much longer history of the Tea Party. The Tea Party also focuses on solutions, not destroying business. | ||
| Cowboy |
I just want to know? As the T party paid for thier rallys just when in hell are these thugs going to pay for the stuff they have destroyed. | ||
| Hootowl |
Seems like the TEA party focused on getting candidates they support into office. What's the OWS crowd doing? Far as I can tell, they're just shitting on cop cars, breaking windows, and vandalizing buildings with messages like "OWS does not authorize the damage you see here". That's not helping their cause. | ||
| Fahren |
Didn't mean to pick back up on the SOS we went thru on past, recent OWS/TparT threads. In fact, the OP was all about someone not a "member" of either group. | ||
| Sifo |
Actually dancing on the flag (anti-Americanism) seems to be exactly their message. There's no doubt that they are 100% anti free market capitalism. Free market capitalism is at the foundation of our country. I don't think these idiots are extremists in that crowd at all. | ||
| Blake |
They need taught a good old fashioned lesson in manners. Ungrateful parasites. Their parents obviously failed in that. | ||
| Blake |
Chris, >>> I'm no tea partier That's just stubborn partisanship talking. By your values and principles, you indeed are a tea partier. Celebrate it. | ||
| Sifo |
How often does one need to see the "extremists" in this group before you finally accept that is who they are? I really don't understand the denial on this point. The Tea Party doesn't have this sort of problem. The pictures come out daily for the occupiers however. It's an extremist movement. Accept it. | ||
| Fahren |
Blake, it's just that, like the great Marx (Groucho), I wouldn't want to join any club who would have me as a member." :- ) Sifo, you have to re-think yourself on the founding fathers and free-market capitalism. Most, including Jefferson, Adams and Franklin, and with the notable exception of Hamilton, were definitely not in favor of laissez-faire, free market capitalism, in the way they envisioned the New Republic. Here's an excellent read: http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?Itemid=267&id =177&option=com_content&task=view | ||
| Buellkowski |
The Tea Party doesn't have this sort of problem. Are you willing to vouch for every single individual who openly totes their firearms to Tea Party gatherings?  Let me know when you start seeing guns at Occupy rallies, then we'll talk about extremists. | ||
| Blake |
Who is promoting laissez-faire free market? I don't know anyone who is. You and the author are arguing a straw man. A whole lot of self-important sounding blathering with little resulting information. You care to distill what the point of that article was? The author in one part towards the end says the following: While rejecting laissez faire, however, (Alexander Hamilton) was emphatic in his commitment to capitalism. Primarily that commitment was moral, not economic, for Hamilton believed that the greatest benefits of government-encouraged private enterprise were not material but spiritual, the enlargement of the scope of human freedom by expanding the opportunities for human endeavor. The emphasis is mine. Again, if you agree with that, then the Tea Party welcomes you! | ||
| Blake |
>>> Let me know when you start seeing guns at Occupy rallies, then we'll talk about extremists. You view the legal and proper carrying of a firearm as some kind of problem, as extremism? Then you must think the following is a problem and extremist too: "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Are you for or against the rule of law? If not for it, then you are for tyranny. Guns may scare you, but guns keep us free. Wise up. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Ok well all i can say is stay classy T party...  | ||
| Drkside79 |
Now do i find all T partakers as scummy as these Ass-hats no but neither are all OWS flag stomping dirt-bags. | ||
| Blake |
I agree with that. I'd clarify that the proportion of scummy types and really poor behavior is hugely weighted towards the OWS crowds. Their arrogance is also insulting. They sure don't speak for me. They are NOT the 99%, they're more like "10% of the 99%". | ||
| Buellkowski |
Guns don't scare me. And I understand those carrying were doing so legally. Why bring guns to a peaceful protest? Guns are for lawful defense. What lethal threat at a peaceful rally are these folks defending themselves against? The presence of firearms at Tea Party gatherings is not defensive, it's provocative. It conveys a threatening message that I find distasteful at protests protected by the rule of law. And Occupiers are extremists when they don't bring guns? | ||
| Pwnzor |
Are you willing to vouch for every single individual who openly totes their firearms to Tea Party gatherings? Yes. Those are, by all appearances, law abiding citizens exercising their legal right to bear arms. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED | ||
| Boltrider |
Open carry vs. flag-stomping? You're forgetting gas masks too. Did Tea Party members bring gas masks to their marches? How does the Oakland riot scene fit into the rule of law? | ||
| Boltrider |
No, occupiers become extremists when they damage property and set fires in the street. Which do you find more distasteful - the few that legally carry guns openly or the little mob that damaged property, set fires, and threw rocks? (Message edited by boltrider on November 07, 2011) | ||
| Buellkowski |
Here's a Tea Partier with a gas-mask...  I'm not making excuses for bad behavior, but I think it's foolish to believe that the Tea Party is utterly immune from extremism. Neither rioting nor (Message edited by buellkowski on November 07, 2011) | ||
| Pwnzor |
Neither rioting nor brandishing firearms has a place in peaceful protests. Show me ONE, just one instance, ANY AT ALL... where a Tea Partier was BRANDISHING a firearm. You DO know the difference between BEARING and BRANDISHING? | ||
| Boltrider |
I disagree with this because of your word usage. Brandishing is a specific crime that involves "a threatening manner" when showing or displaying the weapon. Carrying a gun in a holster on your hip is not in and of itself brandishing. | ||
| Pwnzor |
Let me know when you start seeing guns at Occupy rallies, then we'll talk about extremists. So, the Molotov cocktails, bats, bricks, hammers and other objects they use to smash windows and burn property don't count, right? | ||
| Buellkowski |
You're right. "Brandishing" was too harsh a word to use in my last post. |
