The Tea party is no better than the KKK

  • 90 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -
#2 Edited by deeliman (2423 posts) -
#3 Edited by Kjranu (965 posts) -

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

#4 Posted by Aljosa23 (24851 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

LOL

No.

#5 Edited by THE_DRUGGIE (24964 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

Dude, I LIKED Clinton and I think Clinton's an egomaniac. Went to one of his speeches a year ago (front row, baybay, WHOOO!) and he was a lot of fun to listen to...but then after the whole thing was over, he took pictures with people and always leaned in and put his arm around the chicks, even when taking photos with couples.

But hot diggity, that was a fun speech!

#6 Posted by lostrib (35890 posts) -

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

#7 Edited by deeliman (2423 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

The problem is the tea party nut jobs who held the world economy hostage over a law that had already democratically passed and was upheld by the supreme court.

#8 Edited by deeliman (2423 posts) -

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

#9 Posted by lostrib (35890 posts) -

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

#10 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24964 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

Give it a couple years.

#11 Posted by lostrib (35890 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

Give it a couple years.

I hope it doesn't last that long

#12 Edited by THE_DRUGGIE (24964 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@lostrib said:

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

Give it a couple years.

I hope it doesn't last that long

It's only going to get worse and we all know it.

#13 Posted by lostrib (35890 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@lostrib said:

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

Give it a couple years.

I hope it doesn't last that long

It's only going to get worse and we all know it.

I think if there turn out to be any sweeping gun control changes in the coming years, they will probably lose their god damn minds

#14 Edited by Kjranu (965 posts) -

No, Obama refused to offer one concession on anything. If he had let the Republicans win at least one concession they'd be able to go home happy. But no, Obama being the egomaniac that he is - let the Tea Party radicals win over mainstream Republicans. The fact is the Tea Party caucus don't have enough votes to for a majority in House. The mainstream Republicans still held the deciding vote. Their only teeth was rhetoric. So, no, the Tea Party did not hold the country hostage but Cruz's non-filibuster filibuster and Obama's ego.

#15 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24964 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@lostrib said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@lostrib said:

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

Give it a couple years.

I hope it doesn't last that long

It's only going to get worse and we all know it.

I think if there turn out to be any sweeping gun control changes in the coming years, they will probably lose their god damn minds

I'd say they're only a few more state affirmations of same-sex marriage away from lynching homosexuals.

#16 Posted by deeliman (2423 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@lostrib said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@lostrib said:

@deeliman said:

@lostrib said:

That's just a tad hyperbolic.

You misspelled understatement.

I think they're nut jobs, but they're not as bad as the KKK. At least not overtly

Give it a couple years.

I hope it doesn't last that long

It's only going to get worse and we all know it.

I think if there turn out to be any sweeping gun control changes in the coming years, they will probably lose their god damn minds

It does seem rather unlikely though, a lot of Americans don't want gun control.

#17 Edited by deeliman (2423 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

No, Obama refused to offer one concession on anything. If he had let the Republicans win at least one concession they'd be able to go home happy. But no, Obama being the egomaniac that he is - let the Tea Party radicals win over mainstream Republicans. The fact is the Tea Party caucus don't have enough votes to for a majority in House. The mainstream Republicans still held the deciding vote. Their only teeth was rhetoric. So, no, the Tea Party did not hold the country hostage but Cruz's non-filibuster filibuster and Obama's ego.

The president shouldn't negotiate with terrorists.

#18 Posted by GazaAli (22694 posts) -

They're not. But there are always factions of the extreme right that play it a little smarter in order to be a part of mainstream politics and thus have leverage and actual influence in things.

#19 Edited by Kjranu (965 posts) -

@deeliman said:

@Kjranu said:

No, Obama refused to offer one concession on anything. If he had let the Republicans win at least one concession they'd be able to go home happy. But no, Obama being the egomaniac that he is - let the Tea Party radicals win over mainstream Republicans. The fact is the Tea Party caucus don't have enough votes to for a majority in House. The mainstream Republicans still held the deciding vote. Their only teeth was rhetoric. So, no, the Tea Party did not hold the country hostage but Cruz's non-filibuster filibuster and Obama's ego.

The president shouldn't negotiate with terrorists.

You're a cretin. It's quite clear you don't know how political process is supposed to work in this country.

#20 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -
@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.


The tea parties terms were to defund the AFA.

Doesn't sound like negotiating when it's their way or economic collapse.

Thank god they blinked.

#21 Posted by Kjranu (965 posts) -

Again, Makeme, the Tea Party caucus don't hold enough votes to block anything in House. Mainstream Republicans do. Obama refused to negotiate whatever deal with those Republicans so Tea Party took charge. What did you think would happen? This is a democracy, not a presidential dictatorship.

#22 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

They're not. But there are always factions of the extreme right that play it a little smarter in order to be a part of mainstream politics and thus have leverage and actual influence in things.

got it, subtle racism ;)

#23 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24964 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

Again, Makeme, the Tea Party caucus don't hold enough votes to block anything in House. Mainstream Republicans do. Obama refused to negotiate whatever deal with those Republicans so Tea Party took charge. What did you think would happen? This is a democracy, not a presidential dictatorship.

Man, you need to chill out.

#24 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

Again, Makeme, the Tea Party caucus don't hold enough votes to block anything in House. Mainstream Republicans do. Obama refused to negotiate whatever deal with those Republicans so Tea Party took charge. What did you think would happen? This is a democracy, not a presidential dictatorship.

well republicans gave up and voted for it.

So that's democracy.

And crazy republicans be holding it hostage.

#25 Posted by GazaAli (22694 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

They're not. But there are always factions of the extreme right that play it a little smarter in order to be a part of mainstream politics and thus have leverage and actual influence in things.

got it, subtle racism ;)

And bigotry, and discrimination rofl

#26 Edited by Jimn_tonic (819 posts) -
@Kjranu said:

Again, Makeme, the Tea Party caucus don't hold enough votes to block anything in House. Mainstream Republicans do. Obama refused to negotiate whatever deal with those Republicans so Tea Party took charge. What did you think would happen? This is a democracy, not a presidential dictatorship.

presidential dictatorship?

you know the negotiation revolves around a law that democratically passed in '09 right?

druggie's right..take a pill.

#27 Posted by Solaryellow (477 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

The tea parties terms were to defund the AFA.

Doesn't sound like negotiating when it's their way or economic collapse.

Thank god they blinked.

The demands also changed into asking for a one year delay in full implementation. if certain groups are excluded from the mandate, why not everyone?

#28 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

Yet another anti-republican thread... yawn.

#29 Posted by Rhazakna (11022 posts) -

The only rational response to the Tea Party by a leftist was from Noam Chomsky. Years later that's still true. The mainstream left sucks so damn much. I understand hating the right, I can't understand embracing the carcass of the left.

#30 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@Laihendi said:

Yet another anti-republican thread... yawn.

I noticed that you used to be really aggressive in these threads, but time after time your views were destroyed an painted as being disgusting.

Now you've moved towards a very passive aggressive stance, and are pretty dishonest or don't even state what your true views are.

It's interesting to see how you've evolved.

#31 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@Rhazakna said:

The only rational response to the Tea Party by a leftist was from Noam Chomsky. Years later that's still true. The mainstream left sucks so damn much. I understand hating the right, I can't understand embracing the carcass of the left.

They're both racist and hate gays.

At least the KKK didn't come close to crashing the global economy.

#32 Posted by Lotus-Edge (50439 posts) -

There are some parallels, but the KKK never had this much clout....

#33 Edited by HoolaHoopMan (7777 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

Keep living that delusion. The reps have put themselves down double digit points and lost support for their bullshit. Don't be surprised if democrats get close to, or even take, the majority in the House. Gerrymandering can't save you forever.

#34 Edited by rgsniper1 (9347 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch:

Remember that when you go to vote in 2016, Hillary started the whole birther movement.

#36 Posted by wis3boi (31294 posts) -

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

must be why so many in the GOP rallied to shut things down and then cried to get it open again.

#37 Edited by HoolaHoopMan (7777 posts) -

@HoolaHoopMan said:

@Kjranu said:

The core problem is not the Tea Party but Obama's refusal to negotiate on ANY of the issues. It's why the gov't shut down for three weeks - because he is a total EGOMANIAC. He's no Clinton.

Keep living that delusion. The reps have put themselves down double digit points and lost support for their bullshit. Don't be surprised if democrats get close to, or even take, the majority in the House. Gerrymandering can't save you forever.

They would have made it until 2020, but . . . LOL

Que?

#38 Posted by BranKetra (48459 posts) -

So edgy

#39 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

@Laihendi said:

Yet another anti-republican thread... yawn.

I noticed that you used to be really aggressive in these threads, but time after time your views were destroyed an painted as being disgusting.

Now you've moved towards a very passive aggressive stance, and are pretty dishonest or don't even state what your true views are.

It's interesting to see how you've evolved.

I have not been up to having a serious discussion here in a while since they pretty much always end up going the same way.

#40 Edited by whipassmt (14024 posts) -

Comparing the Tea Party to the KKK is ridiculous. The Tea Party is not a racist organization and it does not have a history of violence.

#41 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

@whipassmt: Leftist dogmatists won't listen though because that doesn't conform to their preconceived notions

#42 Edited by lostrib (35890 posts) -

@Laihendi said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Laihendi said:

Yet another anti-republican thread... yawn.

I noticed that you used to be really aggressive in these threads, but time after time your views were destroyed an painted as being disgusting.

Now you've moved towards a very passive aggressive stance, and are pretty dishonest or don't even state what your true views are.

It's interesting to see how you've evolved.

I have not been up to having a serious discussion here in a while since they pretty much always end up going the same way.

you looking like an idiot/child rapist?

#43 Posted by thegerg (15063 posts) -

What have that done that equates to (or is worse than) lynching people?

#44 Posted by Laihendi (5828 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@Laihendi said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Laihendi said:

Yet another anti-republican thread... yawn.

I noticed that you used to be really aggressive in these threads, but time after time your views were destroyed an painted as being disgusting.

Now you've moved towards a very passive aggressive stance, and are pretty dishonest or don't even state what your true views are.

It's interesting to see how you've evolved.

I have not been up to having a serious discussion here in a while since they pretty much always end up going the same way.

you looking like an idiot/child rapist?

It is contemptible that you would try to associate someone with child rape just because you dislike his philosophical ideology. You should hold yourself to a higher standard.

#45 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@Laihendi said:

@lostrib said:

@Laihendi said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Laihendi said:

Yet another anti-republican thread... yawn.

I noticed that you used to be really aggressive in these threads, but time after time your views were destroyed an painted as being disgusting.

Now you've moved towards a very passive aggressive stance, and are pretty dishonest or don't even state what your true views are.

It's interesting to see how you've evolved.

I have not been up to having a serious discussion here in a while since they pretty much always end up going the same way.

you looking like an idiot/child rapist?

It is contemptible that you would try to associate someone with child rape just because you dislike his philosophical ideology. You should hold yourself to a higher standard.

You did say that parents have the right to sell their children as they own them and that the government shouldn't make child rape a crime.

#46 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@thegerg said:

What have that done that equates to (or is worse than) lynching people?

KKK doesn't do that anymore, they just sorta blow smoke now adays.

who's to say the tea party wouldn't be lynching people if it existed 50+ years ago as a super right wing group?

#47 Posted by rgsniper1 (9347 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch:

I noticed you ignored my Clinton comment. Also who's to say the Democrats wouldn't have been lynching people... oh wait, they were. Just keeping it real.

#48 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3817 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch:

I noticed you ignored my Clinton comment. Also who's to say the Democrats wouldn't have been lynching people... oh wait, they were. Just keeping it real.

I didn't notice it, but no hilary didn't start the movement.

Times change, dems were the conservative party once and republicans were the liberal party.

Then it slowly switched over time.