It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Come 2012, will teabaggers be back behind the GOP?

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 

Your blind devotion to Obama and "the party line" wouldn't be so sad if you weren't pretending to advocate openmindedness.

Stand up for liberalism all you want, but your President doesn't care, so long as he can count on blind devotion.

Obama promised no lobbyists, and lied.

Obama promised to use limited funding for his campaign, and lied.

iObama kept George W. Bush's military tribunals for terror detainees after calling them an "enormous failure" and a "legal black hole." He lied.

His campaign claimed last summer that "court systems . . . are capable of convicting terrorists." He lied.

He insisted in an interview with NBC in 2007 that Congress mandate "consequences" for "a failure to meet various benchmarks and milestones" on aid to Iraq. He fought off legislatively mandated benchmarks in the $97 billion funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. He lied.

Mr. Obama agreed on April 23 to American Civil Liberties Union demands to release investigative photos of detainee abuse. Now's he reversed himself. He lied.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama excoriated Mr. Bush's counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, insisting it could not succeed. Obama rejected warnings of an Afghanistan "quagmire" and ordered more troops to that country. He isn't calling it a "surge" but that's what it is. He is applying in Afghanistan the counterinsurgency strategy Mr. Bush used in Iraq. He lied.

Obama promised to end the Iraq war by withdrawing all troops by March 2009. As president, he set a slower pace of drawdown. He will leave 50,000 Americans troops there. He lied.

Obama campaigned on "responsible fiscal policies," arguing that the "rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy." He pledged to "go through the federal budget line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work."
He lied.

He says he'll "cut the deficit . . . by half by the end of his first term in office" and is "rooting out waste and abuse" in the budget. He lied.

His budget plans a 25% increase in the federal government's share of the GDP, a doubling of the national debt in five years, and a near tripling of it in 10 years. He lied.

On health care, Mr. Obama decried "government-run health care" as "extreme," saying it would lead to "higher costs." He is promoting a plan that would result in a government-run health-care system. He lied.

In the Chrysler bankruptcy and GM reorganization he's ignored Constitutional protections for sanctity of contract and rule of law.

Ad hoc pitches to his favorite constituencies are difficult, at best, to resolve with his promises, and illegal at worst in his restructuring of the U.S.

Your resort to slurs betrays your inability to substantively reply, and reliance on emotional gush in place of debate.

jw




posted on May, 21 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
This really isnt necessary.


"Tea baggers, Bushies, fringers", as you call them, aren't either, but you insist on using them in a sad attempt to qualify or unjustifiably pigeonhole Obama detractors. Face it, conservative ideologies are those of the majority. Many were deceived by Obama's lies.

Party politics only matter to those who are betrothed to one.

Your blindness negates your opinions.

jw



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
They should choose a new name imo. The title of this thread got my hopes up.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Cds4344
 
"They" (tea party protesters) did not choose this name.

Homosexual critics of conservative ideology saw an opportunity to impugn conservatives with a term more aligned with their own preferences and fantasies.

Use of the term has been discredited and disavowed by its' progenitor, Anderson Cooper of the NBC cabal:
"Anderson Cooper Says "Teabagging" Comment Was "Stupid, Silly"
www.abovetopsecret.com...
.

Think for yourself. Vote for the candidate, not the party.

jw



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


I know, I was merely trying to brighten this thread up a little.
In all essence this is a horrible name given to them.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Cds4344
 
OK, how about "Obama F(fill in the blank)ers" ? At least that implies a defensive posture to the rampant usurpation of our Constitutional Rights.

jw



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Did you acquire multiple ATS id's as a ploy, or were you abetted by admins favorable to your POV?

You definitely have more than one ID on ATS. Isn't one opinion enough? Or, do you have to back yourself up to justify shoddy logic and biased opinions?

jw



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
Many people didn't vote last election because of the choice of "2 lesser evils."

No one wants that to happen again. Do you SG? Is that what you want? People don't have a choice...and many are even angrier at Bush than liberals were.

Anyone else notice how the anti-war protesting that the MSM media used to push has now disappeared?

I guess now it's ok to keep fighting wars since Obama is in office.

They've completely backed away from it.

I'm just thoroughly disappointed in you SG. Lately many of your posts have been about the Constitution...which I admired. I thought...well I may not agree with your views...but maybe you are wanting to work together.

Your OP states nothing but the opposite.

I for one hope something new arises...and I think as it continues to get worse in this country...It will happen.

Call it a prediction, call it intuition....i think real change is in the air. If I'm wrong...then I'm wrong.

But you above all people, if you really stand for the Constitution...you above all SHOULD want a "revolution" of sorts.

The thing is...a revolution is not needed.

What is needed is a REBIRTH.

Something has been lost in this country. We need to get it back before it's lost forever.


I guess what you don't see David is the pattern...The tea thingy and the TACTICS/ Psychology inferred in the entire situation strays little from RHETORIC MCPALIN were pumping, it feeds off the same people who watch FOX, Listen limbaugh, SOCIALISTISM, Terrorists, REAL AMERICANS (who supported dismantling our privacy)
initial

YOU KNOW WHATS PATHETIC????

Is that you guys are directing your anger at the come lately politicians... WHO WILL BE VOTED OUT EVENTUALLY.

BUUUUUUUTTTTTTT

I have not heard any of you conservativeusqe folks demanding for LEGAL ACTION against the private PERPETRATORS.... BANKERS, MONEY MEN, LAWS, LOOPHOLES

NOT ONE PEEP

You guys would be allot better off and MORE believable if you spent your energy trying to get the CRIMINALS in the private sector LOCKED UP!

NOTHING.... CRICKETS - from the right, libertarians... etc

IT's like trying to sue a city for a murder in a suburb

The rich and powerful private entities ARE the CATALYST - so talk about hook - line and sinker...

YOU guys could PROTESTS BANKS INVOLVED
REFUSE TO PAY YOUR CREDIT CARD BILLS TO SUCH ENTITIES--
....

HELL there are a million thing you can do

- but alas - nothing...

The RONALD REAGAN dream of man eat poor man will endure for the right, TB's, LIBERS and the like, hopefully it will finally receive its final burial.

Instead you reckon returning to pre Lincoln era governance will fix the problems???

Give me a break

ITS weak... demolish the castle so you can fix the pipes


- its illogical,half baked, smells like Murdoch and good luck on your attempt to drain the ocean.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
Your blind devotion to Obama and "the party line" wouldn't be so sad if you weren't pretending to advocate openmindedness.


I voted for Obama because of his policies, which perfectly align with mine. I dont need to pretend to be anything here for sake of joining the "anti-two party" movement folks got going here.


Stand up for liberalism all you want, but your President doesn't care,


Coming from an anti-Obama individual since the campaign that really is irrilevent. Tell me do you think those GOP politicians and fox news gave a damn about this tea party movement prior to the elections? Because they seem have taken control of it lately.


Obama promised no lobbyists, and lied.


Obama raised campaign funds from individual voters and had no lobbyists in his campaign. Im not really concerned about whether lobbyists exist in government, thats an inevitability. Dont expect him to change everything within a matter of months, and I dont expect you to think any differently once things improve, because people like you will hate regardless.


Obama promised to use limited funding for his campaign, and lied.


Proof please? I couldnt care howmuch funding he got so long as it was individuals giving the amount they choose to. Why are you angry at him because he earned so much money? I thought you were for the freedom of individuals to donate what they want?



His campaign claimed last summer that "court systems . . . are capable of convicting terrorists." He lied.


I really aint concerned about the little tiblets you folks pulled out there. The man is closing Gitmo and his ending torture towards suspects. Good on him! keep up the good work!


He insisted in an interview with NBC in 2007 that Congress mandate "consequences" for "a failure to meet various benchmarks and milestones" on aid to Iraq. He fought off legislatively mandated benchmarks in the $97 billion funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.


Thats because the funing didnt include the closing down of Gitmo and it was mostly for war funding as opposed to aid where as there were to be withdrawals from Iraq and gradual ending of mass funding there. Im sure Iraq and their $87 surplus will be fine as dandy.

Now just before you were complaining about him lying about some aspects regarding Gitmo, yet this bill you referenced had no detail in closing down Gitmo. Would you be any different calling him a liar if he did support it? Hateful regardless.


Mr. Obama agreed on April 23 to American Civil Liberties Union demands to release investigative photos of detainee abuse. Now's he reversed himself.


Good on him. We have a job to finish in Afghanistan, the last thing we need are these pictures getting out while troops are still fighting against the 9/11 killers in afghanistan.

The man just came into office and is beginning to withdraw troops from Iraq and to put more focus on Afghanistan. We really dont need anymore of this crap now. Once again Obama is doing exactly what I voted him in for.


Throughout his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama excoriated Mr. Bush's counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, insisting it could not succeed.


Im not concerned about this "counterinsurgency", Im concerned about the reason we're there in the first place. Bush lied about Iraq as did his conservative buddies and damn straight we shouldnt be there in the first place. What the hell are you going on about counterinsurgency when the war is an overall lie? The you go on about how he doesnt want to release those pictures. Will you make up your mind where you stand?


Obama rejected warnings of an Afghanistan "quagmire" and ordered more troops to that country.


Wait a minute. So you first criticize Obama for not supporting this "counterinsurgency" in a war that is a lie to start with, then you go about him sipporting a war where we started our war on terrorism in the first place, where those 9/11 killers still roam. So in actual fact your critical of him for not supporting the Iraq war, but critical when he supports Afghanistan. Are you confused here? Is this really what Im hearing from you?

Im done here with you. For somebody who outright supports the war of lies in Iraq, but is critical of support for the war in Afghanistan, one could see you readily bought into the garbage the neoconservatives fed you.

This is my concern, in the very OP I did. Individuals like you, in these tea parties, who readily have support for the war in Iraq, who still believe the garbage the prior administration fed you, and forgets why we are in Afghanistant for the first place. Come 2012 I really question where folks like you will be.

[edit on 21-5-2009 by Southern Guardian]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by atswheat
 


Well i'll be... there does exist reality here after all.

Well put my friend. Heck I couldnt care if folks are totally the opposite to what the dems and progressives are pushing for, but for petes sakes get off the GOP manufactured "grassroots movement".


As opposed to the Democrat Party manufactured "grass roots movement" of the previous administration? That cracks me up. Really!

It appears to me that the entire premise of the original post is nothing more than fear. Sort of the way children hold their hands over their eyes and say "LA LA LA LA..." in the face of an unpleasant reality. Maybe if you ignore it long enough, it will just cease to be real. A sort of whistling past the graveyard. That's what I expect of "progressives", who insist on clinging to partisanship, and since they do, the rest of the population MUST be doing the same thing! By conflating "conservatives" with "Republicans", they seek to marginalize both with the same pen stroke. Unfortunately, they are not the same.

Marginalize away, but be not surprised when that "grassroots movement" refuses to stay marginalized.

There is a thread here that pokes a heap of fun at the false left/right dichotomy that "progressives" are so invested in maintaining. I've noticed a conspicuous lack of "progressives" and "liberals" in that thread, where normally a thundering herd would be charging in. The only conclusions that I can draw are that they:

A) Are lacking in a sense of humor

B) Are fearful that they can't keep up

C) Feel threatened that the false dichotomy is exposed, or

D) Some combination of the above.

Otherwise, they'd be there in droves, attempting to justify and strengthen their continued drive towards partisan bickering.

nenothtu out



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


When is the next tea party scheduled and where? I don't recall seeing any tea parties in my area. Every morning, I enjoy a vanilla rooibos tea latte at Starbucks..sometimes I'll have a floral based tea in the evening. I'm not sure if I qualify as a teabagger, but knowing about these tea parties will make me feel quite lonely next time I find myself sipping on some tea.

...And I think it depends on who gets the GOP nomination in 2012.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join