tea partiers try to blow people up as thanks for healthcare. classy.
03-25-2010, 10:09 AM
#1
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
tea partiers try to blow people up as thanks for healthcare. classy.
Just one quote from an article on WaPo:
The story goes on and on.
This is healthcare. What the **** is wrong with people?
I can understand being violent for, say, starting an unjustified war but for healthcare? Did I miss the part of the new law where democrats ***-rape your grandparents before they get put up for the death panel?
You can disagree with it all you want, that's fine. (We have a thread for debating its merits--and I'll delete or move any debate posts in this thread). But throwing bricks and death threats? I guess it's much easier to take rash action than use your brain.
I miss the golden days of just calling congressmen "------" and "------".
You might have to log in for the whole article.
I'd suggest bugmenot.com
Lawmakers concerned as health-care overhaul foes resort to violence - washingtonpost.com
Over the next 24 hours, thrown bricks shattered the glass doors and windows of party headquarters from Rochester, N.Y., to Cincinnati. A propane gas line at the Charlottesville home of Rep. Tom Perriello's brother was severed Tuesday after a self-identified "tea party" activist posted what he believed to be the Virginia Democrat's address on a Web site and urged opponents to "drop by" to convey their opposition to his yes vote on the health bill.
This is healthcare. What the **** is wrong with people?
I can understand being violent for, say, starting an unjustified war but for healthcare? Did I miss the part of the new law where democrats ***-rape your grandparents before they get put up for the death panel?
You can disagree with it all you want, that's fine. (We have a thread for debating its merits--and I'll delete or move any debate posts in this thread). But throwing bricks and death threats? I guess it's much easier to take rash action than use your brain.
I miss the golden days of just calling congressmen "------" and "------".
You might have to log in for the whole article.
I'd suggest bugmenot.com
Lawmakers concerned as health-care overhaul foes resort to violence - washingtonpost.com
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:16 AM
#2
I think you'll find most conservative commentators are fairly outraged at these incidents.
Of course, when ACORN or labor unions get violent, it gets washed over and ignored by the news, or dismissed as just a few whackos and not indicative of the entire group or movement.
Of course, when ACORN or labor unions get violent, it gets washed over and ignored by the news, or dismissed as just a few whackos and not indicative of the entire group or movement.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:22 AM
#3
The way I look at it is there is way to much tension built up over this for people not to do anything. And some people take things to the extremes and do something completely unrational. But as said, this is not the ideas and beliefs of the group, but rather only a few 'nuckin' futs' individuals within the group.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:32 AM
#5
When no one is listening and the government is not listening to the will of the people the constitution says we have the right to disband the government and start a new one. If it takes bricks to wake people up then by god that's what we need to do. Power to the people mother *******. This country is going down a ****-path to socialist ruin and all the pussies are sitting on the sidelines saying this is awful but not doing a ******* thing about it. Viva La Revolution!! This is incremental change so folks don't get TOO outraged but the path is steady. Your liberties, your ability for personal choice, your privacy, your protection from illegal search and seizure are all either gone or going. Wake up folks.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:38 AM
#6
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
I think you'll find most conservative commentators are fairly outraged at these incidents.
Of course, when ACORN or labor unions get violent, it gets washed over and ignored by the news, or dismissed as just a few whackos and not indicative of the entire group or movement.
Of course, when ACORN or labor unions get violent, it gets washed over and ignored by the news, or dismissed as just a few whackos and not indicative of the entire group or movement.
ACORN is out there goading people and being instigators. Chances are when you pick a fight, you get a fight.
But this is the passage of a healthcare law...
The way I look at it is there is way to much tension built up over this for people not to do anything. And some people take things to the extremes and do something completely unrational. But as said, this is not the ideas and beliefs of the group, but rather only a few 'nuckin' futs' individuals within the group.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:39 AM
#7
When no one is listening and the government is not listening to the will of the people the constitution says we have the right to disband the government and start a new one. If it takes bricks to wake people up then by god that's what we need to do. Power to the people mother *******. This country is going down a ****-path to socialist ruin and all the pussies are sitting on the sidelines saying this is awful but not doing a ******* thing about it. Viva La Revolution!! This is incremental change so folks don't get TOO outraged but the path is steady. Your liberties, your ability for personal choice, your privacy, your protection from illegal search and seizure are all either gone or going. Wake up folks.
If you can say "absolutely yes" then so be it. But until then a civil society should remain just that, regardless of how far left things are swinging. Things have been just as far to the other side of the aisle before, and I didn't see libs picking up bricks.
The bold part should definitely be heeded though. Not enough people are voicing their concerns...and those that are have apparently decided they can't quite shout loud enough.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:43 AM
#8
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
When no one is listening and the government is not listening to the will of the people the constitution says we have the right to disband the government and start a new one. If it takes bricks to wake people up then by god that's what we need to do. Power to the people mother *******. This country is going down a ****-path to socialist ruin and all the pussies are sitting on the sidelines saying this is awful but not doing a ******* thing about it. Viva La Revolution!! This is incremental change so folks don't get TOO outraged but the path is steady. Your liberties, your ability for personal choice, your privacy, your protection from illegal search and seizure are all either gone or going. Wake up folks.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:44 AM
#9
Almost funny, were it not the ugly truth.
Originally Posted by Martin Luther King Jr.
Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.
Being mad is one thing, but using hatred as a means to an end is another.
http://trueslant.com/allisonkilkenny...reform-medley/
Looks like this has been brewing for a while. Yes, I'd like to see things change, but not if it involves bloodying the face of my neighbor, or to be-little him when we live in the free-est country in the world.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:49 AM
#10
yep. The path we're on wasn't invented by Dems. The Repubs are just as shifty and arrogant. The Republican stance of small government disappeared a long time ago. They are all useless to be quite honest. I am a libertarian, I believe the government needs to be a very small entity with limited power. That was Thomas Jefferson's idea and I think he had it right.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:50 AM
#11
Almost funny, were it not the ugly truth.
Lot of hatred going on these days...
Being mad is one thing, but using hatred as a means to an end is another.
The violence and lies post-reform medley - Allison Kilkenny - Unreported - True/Slant
Looks like this has been brewing for a while. Yes, I'd like to see things change, but not if it involves bloodying the face of my neighbor, or to be-little him when we live in the free-est country in the world.
Lot of hatred going on these days...
Being mad is one thing, but using hatred as a means to an end is another.
The violence and lies post-reform medley - Allison Kilkenny - Unreported - True/Slant
Looks like this has been brewing for a while. Yes, I'd like to see things change, but not if it involves bloodying the face of my neighbor, or to be-little him when we live in the free-est country in the world.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:53 AM
#12
I'm pretty pissed about the erosion of liberty, but if we as citizens can't elect government officials who will respect individual liberty, the rule of the law, and the authority of the Constitution, then what's the point in throwing bricks?
Try showing up at the polls and voting for someone who doesn't want to run every aspect of your life. That might actually do some good.
Try showing up at the polls and voting for someone who doesn't want to run every aspect of your life. That might actually do some good.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:53 AM
#13
I hear you, but I think we should let the states fight this, before we resort to violent protests.
I'm pretty sure the State AGs and SCOTUS will stand to preserve the federal system. If not, then yes, our government has failed our Constitution, and we should oust them.
I'm pretty sure the State AGs and SCOTUS will stand to preserve the federal system. If not, then yes, our government has failed our Constitution, and we should oust them.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 10:58 AM
#14
The two party system prevents the people from electing who they really want for president. Folks that want a libertarian president won't vote that way for fear of "wasting" their vote.
Great example of how fucked the two party system is, more often then not when a bill comes up for vote the dems all vote one way and the repubs all vote the other, right down party lines. Do you think these "representatives" are voting for the will of their constituents or god forbid, their morals? Nope, just playing the game.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 11:03 AM
#15
The two party system (well, more accurately, the electoral college) does force candidates to the center in order to gain votes. However, we've shifted gradually to the left over the years -- we can shift back.
And honestly, it's better than the alternatives. If you don't have a system like the electoral college that reduces options down to two parties with basically centrist positions, then you have dozens of minority parties, and a bare plurality can elect a government that almost none of the citizenship actually supports.
And honestly, it's better than the alternatives. If you don't have a system like the electoral college that reduces options down to two parties with basically centrist positions, then you have dozens of minority parties, and a bare plurality can elect a government that almost none of the citizenship actually supports.
This is a great idea however....
The two party system prevents the people from electing who they really want for president. Folks that want a libertarian president won't vote that way for fear of "wasting" their vote.
Great example of how fucked the two party system is, more often then not when a bill comes up for vote the dems all vote one way and the repubs all vote the other, right down party lines. Do you think these "representatives" are voting for the will of their constituents or god forbid, their morals? Nope, just playing the game.
The two party system prevents the people from electing who they really want for president. Folks that want a libertarian president won't vote that way for fear of "wasting" their vote.
Great example of how fucked the two party system is, more often then not when a bill comes up for vote the dems all vote one way and the repubs all vote the other, right down party lines. Do you think these "representatives" are voting for the will of their constituents or god forbid, their morals? Nope, just playing the game.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 11:07 AM
#16
And honestly, it's better than the alternatives. If you don't have a system like the electoral college that reduces options down to two parties with basically centrist positions, then you have dozens of minority parties, and a bare plurality can elect a government that almost none of the citizenship actually supports.
Do we really want 1/3rd of our nation deciding how the rest will live?
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 11:14 AM
#17
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,019
Total Cats: 6,587
Does nobody care that CA is about to vote on a proposal to legalize marijuana for recreational use, and that the only folks who are voicing objection to it are the ones who are currently growing pot illegally, and are worried about the fact that this law will decrease the value of their crop?
To hell with healthcare. This will destabilize the Humboldt County economy!
To hell with healthcare. This will destabilize the Humboldt County economy!
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 11:55 AM
#18
Does nobody care that CA is about to vote on a proposal to legalize marijuana for recreational use, and that the only folks who are voicing objection to it are the ones who are currently growing pot illegally, and are worried about the fact that this law will decrease the value of their crop?
To hell with healthcare. This will destabilize the Humboldt County economy!
To hell with healthcare. This will destabilize the Humboldt County economy!
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 12:01 PM
#19
Does nobody care that CA is about to vote on a proposal to legalize marijuana for recreational use, and that the only folks who are voicing objection to it are the ones who are currently growing pot illegally, and are worried about the fact that this law will decrease the value of their crop?
To hell with healthcare. This will destabilize the Humboldt County economy!
To hell with healthcare. This will destabilize the Humboldt County economy!
We're not visiting her family in Mexico this year.
Reply
0
0
03-25-2010, 12:08 PM
#20
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
This is a great idea however....
The two party system prevents the people from electing who they really want for president. Folks that want a libertarian president won't vote that way for fear of "wasting" their vote.
Great example of how fucked the two party system is, more often then not when a bill comes up for vote the dems all vote one way and the repubs all vote the other, right down party lines. Do you think these "representatives" are voting for the will of their constituents or god forbid, their morals? Nope, just playing the game.
The two party system prevents the people from electing who they really want for president. Folks that want a libertarian president won't vote that way for fear of "wasting" their vote.
Great example of how fucked the two party system is, more often then not when a bill comes up for vote the dems all vote one way and the repubs all vote the other, right down party lines. Do you think these "representatives" are voting for the will of their constituents or god forbid, their morals? Nope, just playing the game.
The next few election cycles might be the best chance to change that political landscape. Tons of moderates are simply fed up with both parties. The right leader could definitely make a run at the White House using the same fundraising strategy that worked so well for Obama.
Edit: The notion that nothing is better is off.
1) OK, so a candiate won with 30% vote. That really does suck. The again, how many people vote for someone they basically can barely stand as it is right now? Just because 60% of the people vote for one person over the other does not mean that 60% of the people are happy or have their wishes relfected. It just means that 60% of the people hated one guy less. Thats about how it is for the last three presidentia elections. So lets say we have a three party system. And someone wins with 45% of the vote, the next guy has 30% and the guy after that got 25%. That does not mean that 55% of the people are totaly unsatisfied any more than it means that 60% are totaly happy in the first scenario. Chances are fair that about 30% of the people did not get who they wanted but at least they did not get the guy they hated. Which IMHO is much, much better than right now. A three party system would be a huge improvement.
Reply
0
0
