It's a Civil War: What We Do Now

[Praktik]

My dad always calls them "tea baggers" (often followed by some expletives) and I'm 99% certain he's not aware of the testicle-related use of the term. He hates them more than I do, but I know he dislikes that type of crude humor. They may be stuck with it due to the less "hip" members of society I'm afraid.

...and people like me, who don't shrink from any opportunity to make an off-colour joke!

 

[Newtons Bit]

Actually the opposition to the tea party(ies) has been very civil. They've even set up cooling and refreshment tents in one very dry location currently flooded with Tea Partiers. So maybe the civil is only from one side? Or a little bit from both sides?

---------------------------------

Today in the break room HLN had a thing about the Tea Partiers who are traveling to that town and I made the comment that I wished I had enough time and money to drive and fly around the country bitching about the government taking some of my money.

I wouldn't call the opposition to the tea parties "civil. It's definitely less rude than what the tea party has been doing, but then again, protesters are generally rude. Anderson Cooper's remark of "how do they talk with their mouth full?" comment comes to mind. The labeling of the entire movement as a sex-act cannot be referred to as "civil". The consistent arguments that they are violent crazies, even if spoken in soft tones and without rude language, is still uncivil. You can't call someone a homicidal retard without coming across as rude. But that's just politics I guess.

 

[coalesce]

Thomas Jefferson - "A strong democracy depends on an informed electorate."

Too bad in Texas, they may want get a chance to read it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1253

"Core values" my Sicilian posterior!!!

Michael

 

[Newtons Bit]

Too bad in Texas, they may want get a chance to read it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1253

"Core values" my Sicilian posterior!!!

Michael

From that article, which is way off-topic, but this amuses me.

A recommendation to include country and western music among the nation’s important cultural movements. The popular black genre of hip-hop is being dropped from the same list.

Them's fighting words! I'll take the BEP's over any country/western music anyday.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You claimed that it was the "will of the people" that there be banking reform (proving whatever).
Maybe so … but my point is that if the will of the people is controlled by the media and the mainstream portion of that media on which democrats largely depend for their news and views has grossly misinformed the people as to the real facts, then the "will" is not based on information but propaganda. And that could lead to the wrong action.

Yes, I understand your point (you don't trust the people sometimes). You have missed mine.

Republicans kept saying the Democrats were wrong to pass healthcare reform because they said polls showed the Democrats weren't listening to the people. Now some Republicans are threatening to pout and not participate in any more legislation. I'm pointing out that they're doing exactly what they accused the Democrats of.

I fail to see what I misconstrued.

Yes, I know.

 

[coalesce]

From that article, which is way off-topic, but this amuses me.

I don't think it's off-topic at all. Mr. Prager wants to stress America's "core values." Is censorship (excising a quite prominent American President and a founding father from the textbooks) a "core value?" Why bother to quote Thomas Jefferson when there's a good chance that a large number of future students may not get the opportunity to learn about him in class?

So I ask again, since there are people out there (and certainly on this board) who are convinced that this nation is heading down the wrong path: Is censorship a "core value?" If so, how? How is censorship an admirable trait? How is it even defensible?

Michael

 

[Tricky]

Moved a couple of posts to AAH. Let's calm down folks. It is one thing to disagree with another's opinion. It is quite another to suggest that they would fight against the government in an armed militia. So show a bit more civility. Everybody.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[BeAChooser]

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/30/americas-quiet-anger "America's Quiet Anger"

 

[Tricky]

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/30/americas-quiet-anger "America's Quiet Anger"

From that article:

It is the fury of the voiceless, the powerless, the ordinary nobodies of Flyover Country who are ridiculed, preached to, satirized and insulted by the Celebrity Loudmouths of the two Left Coasts, the Jon Stewarts and Keith Olbermanns, the Paul Krugmans and their ilk.

Sounds like a real balanced view, doesn't it? Tell me BaC, do you read anything besides conservative rags?

 

[BeAChooser]

Tell me BaC, do you read anything besides conservative rags?

Actually, Tricky, I read and listen to both sides before making up my mind. Including a big city leftist mainstream paper and the nightly news on ABC, MSNBC and CNN. But I also read and listen to what the other side says. Do you do both on a regular basis, or are you constantly surprised by the many facts I bring to this forum from the other side of the house because you primary get your news from mainstream sources like you said recently?

 

[Tricky]

Actually, Tricky, I read and listen to both sides before making up my mind. Including a big city leftist mainstream paper and the nightly news on ABC, MSNBC and CNN. But I also read and listen to what the other side says. Do you do both on a regular basis, or are you constantly surprised by the many facts I bring to this forum from the other side of the house because you primary get your news from mainstream sources like you said recently?

I mostly get my news from mainstream, and I prefer papers to TV, though I will occasionally watch Bill O'Reilly, and I do read the articles you link. However, I find that the extremist sources, on either side, are short on facts and long on opinion, and I frankly don't have enough time to spend reading the news all day. So I go to a centrist source which is mostly news with only a little opinion.

So why don't you cite any facts from leftist sources?

 

[BeAChooser]

So I go to a centrist source which is mostly news with only a little opinion.

And who exactly would those sources be? Let's see if they are as unbiased as you think?

So why don't you cite any facts from leftist sources?

LOL! You don't think the NYTimes and Washington Post are leftist sources?

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Compared to sources such as the Heritage Foundation and Worldnetdaily...the encyclopedia Britannica is a leftist source.

 

[BeAChooser]

So FFM, do you want to offer the name of a source you claim is unbiased?

 

[joobz]

So FFM, do you want to offer the name of a source you claim is unbiased?

I don't remember FFM claiming his sources were "unbiased" only that the calibration on your left/right politimeter is set to wackadoodle conservative.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

I don't remember FFM claiming his sources were "unbiased" only that the calibration on your left/right politimeter is set to wackadoodle conservative.

What he said.

For example WND has more in common with Alex Jones' Prison Planet than either Fox News or MSNBC.

 

[Thunder]

LOL! You don't think the NYTimes and Washington Post are leftist sources?

I prefer to call them Commy pinko Sissy-Queers.

 

[BeAChooser]

FFM ... this should make you happy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/business/30subsidy.html

An association representing 300 large corporations urged President Obama and Congress on Monday to repeal a provision of the health care overhaul that prompted AT&T, Caterpillar and other companies to announce substantial charges for the current quarter.

The association, the American Benefits Council, said the provision — which reduces the tax deductions for companies with drug coverage for their retired employees — would deal a significant blow to corporate profits and would discourage companies from hiring more workers.

 

[tyr_13]

FFM ... this should make you happy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/business/30subsidy.html

From that same article.

"“Let’s put these changes into perspective,” Ms. Douglass said. “While accounting rules required companies to book this cost upfront, there are a whole set of benefits that will accrue to companies over time that they’re not booking upfront.”

Federal officials estimate that the provision will raise $4.5 billion to $5 billion in revenue over 10 years, but Mr. Klein maintained that it would cost the government more than it raised. "

So some companies are against some changes. That makes it a civil war and 'massive opposition' how?

 

[fullflavormenthol]

From that same article.

"“Let’s put these changes into perspective,” Ms. Douglass said. “While accounting rules required companies to book this cost upfront, there are a whole set of benefits that will accrue to companies over time that they’re not booking upfront.”

Federal officials estimate that the provision will raise $4.5 billion to $5 billion in revenue over 10 years, but Mr. Klein maintained that it would cost the government more than it raised. "

So some companies are against some changes. That makes it a civil war and 'massive opposition' how?

Oh, but it is always easier to quote mine because it gives the impression to the "audience" that I just got served or something; I say give him his little "victories" every now and then. Because no one would ever dream of clicking on the link.