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.
originally posted by: 3danimator2014
originally posted by: Metallicus
She hits the Obama's economic policy and the state of the economy and she goes on to say how she is all for womens right.
How is anything in the above sentence wrong? These are all right on the nose.
I think the left simply likes to attack conservative women.
Like Sarah Palin? They could be twins, at least mentally.
They are both actually highly intelligent women which is what scares the left.
Bachman and palin are not intelligent. Not remotely intelligent. They are an embarrasement to US politics. How ANYONE can say that they are smart with a straight face is beyond me. And no, they do not scare liberals because they are simple women. Im not from the US so i have no affiliation to either side.
Wendy Davis seemed fairly intelligent. Bachmann? Just no. Ugh
originally posted by: babybunnies
originally posted by: dreamingawake
When people talk about a plant(shill) they try to conclude it's Rand or Sanders to throw everyone off. To make them think everything will be okay. However, she's the clear definition of that for the Repubs and Hyjaked Tea Party.
The TEA Party was hijacked by special interests almost right from the start. Koch and Co took it over and turned it into a horrible far, far right wing party.
If it had of remained grass roots, they actually might have had some good, reasonable ideas.
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: babybunnies
originally posted by: dreamingawake
When people talk about a plant(shill) they try to conclude it's Rand or Sanders to throw everyone off. To make them think everything will be okay. However, she's the clear definition of that for the Repubs and Hyjaked Tea Party.
The TEA Party was hijacked by special interests almost right from the start. Koch and Co took it over and turned it into a horrible far, far right wing party.
If it had of remained grass roots, they actually might have had some good, reasonable ideas.
I'm sorry but I've got to say it; "Hijacked my ass!" Did they threaten them with a gun or box-cutter, or what? Explain to me just how did the Koch brothers make the Tea Party voters, vote the way they did and still do?
The Tea Party was far right-wing from the very beginning and all the Koch brothers and Dick Armey did was to provide the name recognition and financial backing needed for them to become a viable voting block.
And just look at what we got for it... The biggest collection of congressional right-wing obstructionist lunatics in U.S. history.. Michelle Bachman being a prime example. Need more? How about Ted Cruz or Louie Gohmert? I could go on and on.
Last I checked, the Koch brothers only make up two votes so it sure as hell wasn't them who elected these nuts to Congress.
Right-wingers did this all by their ignorant, gullible selves and to say they were "hijacked" into voting those people into office is just a "cop-out."
I think the real reasoning behind their, (the Koch brothers and the Tea Party) affiliation was just due to the age-old fact that "birds of a feather, flock together."
ETA; I almost forgot, "a few reasonable ideas" is a pretty low bar for a "political movement."
Hell, I'm pretty sure that even Charles Manson had a reasonable idea or two in his lifetime, but I wouldn't vote for him just because of that.
originally posted by: Lanisius
Sanders disguises himself as an Independent yet caucuses with the Democratic party, not an Independent party. He's also a self proclaimed Democratic Socialist...not my political cup of tea at all. In fact, my view is less government intervention equals greater liberty for the individual.
originally posted by: Osiris1953
Also, this can be eye opening in terms of which candidate/party you really should be aligned with based upon your individual belief structures. It's a good quiz, and doesn't take long. Apparently I'm in agreement with Mr. Sanders on 84% of the issues.
ISideWith.com
John Adams said:
There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.
George Washington agreed, saying in his farewell presidential speech:
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
originally posted by: Bearack
WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO SPEND AT THIS RATE! AND THERE IS NO SUCH THINGS AS "FREE" AS THE ENTITLEMENT CLASS SEEMS TO THINK!
originally posted by: Osiris1953
originally posted by: Bearack
WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO SPEND AT THIS RATE! AND THERE IS NO SUCH THINGS AS "FREE" AS THE ENTITLEMENT CLASS SEEMS TO THINK!
This is what gets me... Who's hanging their cowboy hat on labels?
How about we not further denigrate the impoverished by referring to them as entire class. Is this India? Should we have a caste system? Let's have some untouchables that we can talk about.
It's the large corporations that are really the entitlement whores, not some poor bastard making $7.25/hr.
originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Bearack
It's not possible to make 7.25 an hour and have a big screen and an iPhone 6 let's be realistic here.
The rest of what you say is true though.