All of the Tea Party hate from the establishment...

[Skroe]

That data was far too random there isn't a single metric that held throughout the paper. Social issues on one page, economics on the other. It's too many things to try to make a convincing argument. Nor does it say that leftist is X and rightist is Y. It uses the words left and right as if they were defined. They weren't.

On top of that those statistics are quite shabby. A few random districts with a few random precints. I'm not sure what the exact sizes of the samples were. I'm not sure if the statistics are even valuable enough to make an argument.

Reading this as "I don't like what it says so I'm disregarding it and questioning it's metholodgy". This is like the Tea Party's "Hadoken". Quarter-circle forward, LP friend.

You just don't like living in a country that rejects your positions generally speaking.

I'm an Extremist? I'm considered liberal on social issues (bite my tongue, that isn't what liberal means) and conservative on economic issues. How does that make me extremist? I want people to be able to do for themselves? That makes me extremist?

I've read what you've written on economic issues. They're so far out of the American mainstream it's laughable. It's like saying me, space advocate number one, that we should gut medicare and medicaid and start building an anti-matter generator for a Warp Engine. Yeah... I would love if we spent as much as we do on our social saftey net on science and technology... but ya know what? It's never gonna happen. It's not what most people in this country want. It's not even a smart policy for like a dozen reason. But when you come down to it, it's just fantastical.

Your economic positions... I've read them at length. They're nuts. They're garbage. Like I'm not sure where you picked up your economic background, but it's so fundamentally unsound and internally contradicting, it's difficult to imagine you being serious. They've been disproven and directly undermined on many occasions by research and work posted in response. To be honest, you're one of the easier people here to engage with. It just doesn't take a lot of work to knock over your position. Some people it does. With you? Not so much. And I know you are serious, but you know, regardless of your beliefs, and crazy as they are you're entitled to them, no one else in the country is really buying. And there is your problem.

You need people's assent, otherwise you're just inflicting your beliefs on the country. And if recent history is anything, country is rejecting you pretty damn hard.

"Botched respsonse to Katrina?" HA! Everyone knew a hurricane was coming. The city is built well below sea level. It was a disaster waiting to happen. The people were told to evacuate. They didn't. It's on them.

You see... this is what is known as "missing the point", which you do a lot. The nature of New Orleans's design may be true, but that's not what we're being judged on. We're being judged on the FEMA response. Now you can think it's on them, but at the end of the day Linkedblade, you're just some dude from New Jersey who played on Shattered Hand a little. You don't matter. I don't matter. We're just guys. But the images and stories of the botched response were shot around the world and informed foreign opinion of us. It sullied our international reputation a country that means business and get's things done. No one ever expected America to look like Bangladesh, and that's what the entire world saw.

So you're completely entitled, man from New Jersey, to think it's "on them". But you know what? That's not the point. The point is when it came to "what happens next", we epicly dropped the ball. And the human race saw us do it.

Try to be less parochial.

[Linkedblade]

You just don't like living in a country that rejects your positions generally speaking.

I'm not sure you are someone that can speak on behalf of the country.

[Kraenen]

As I put out earlier, here's some prime examples of some far left loons

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

There are many many more.

stop posting this as if it proves your point. this is like arguing against a ....what was it, toaster?

[Skroe]

I'll be the first to admit that the Tea-party elements of our gov't (cruz for example) have hijacked the Republican party. They eventually will die out as they are quickly losing support. After the fiasco this month, its only a matter of time before they go the way of the Doo doo. As a conservative I just hope that it happens fast enough that we can get a solid backing for the elections in 2016. We are going to need to be united if we are going to win.

I've stated on a different thread that I really didn't like how this whole shutdown was done. The ACA passed the house, senate, and withstood SCOTUS scrutiny. Its law. You win some you lose some. To shut down the Gov't because they didn't get their way is immature, and ultimately self-destructive.

If guys like Cruz really believe that the ACA is going to be that bad, let it go into effect, fail, and use the failure to gain seats I the next election and repeal it.

Frankly, I think before we worry about winning 2016, we need to do some serious house cleaning. Losing the 2000 election was probably the best thing to ever happen to Democrats in retrospect (as a party). Desperation is the mother of invention as they say. From 2000 to 2008 they redesigned everything about their party and campaign and developed sophisticated technology and in-the-trenches political operations. Some of it was prototyped in 2004, but it came of age in 2008 and turned into this President-Generating Machine in 2012.

Republicans are years behind technologically and organizationally. Democrats aren't sitting still. They're improving their technology and their methods. They'll have new political weapons in 2016. It's honestly fine that they keep pioneering that stuff now. Republicans need to build up to it, but Democrats have a party that is very clearly the most united it's been since any moment in my life time. Fundamentally what Democrats did was modernize themselves, their positions, and their message.

Even the ACA is reflective of that. 15 years ago it would have been unthinkable for Democrats to do anything other than a Single Payer system. Instead they adopt what is factually a conservative sourced market based insurance reform plan. That's extraordinary. It's likely a bridge to a Single Payer system in the next 20 years, but the fact it became their core policy plan is remarkable.

We need to modernize. We need to throw the Tea Party people out. They need to go. They can go form a third party, and win some districts for a few cycles, but it'll taper off and they'll be the non-entities again that they very much need to be made.

The Tea Party, in their infinite stupidity, doesn't have the wisdom to look at what the American people say when asked. How do people define as conservative, but then say the social safety net is important and Obamacare based reforms are critical? How does that electorate overwhelmingly elect a man who pledged to raise taxes? It's because the big-government / small-government dichotomy is a stupid one that has been inflicted upon the American people. What Americans really want is EFFECTIVE government. Not too big. Not too small. A lean, mean, efficient machine.

Republicans should see the "Small Government" ground to the Tea Party. It's a stupid political place to be that cannot exist in a country with a rapidly aging population that will draw on Medicare and Medicaid like ever before. Republicans should Embrace "Efficient Government" as their mantra. Let Democrats be the party of Big Government. Let Republicans be the party of making sure that there are consequences when Pentagon contracts run 5 years behind and 300% over budget. Embrace comprehensive Immigration, Tax Code reform, and public investment. Don't "starve the beast". Invest smartly. Spend less on subsidies, more on scientific research and education.

If this sounds like Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats, that's essentially correct. And it works. She's by far the most successful elected leader in the world. And she governs just-right of center.

Bill Clinton did this, just left of center, with Triangulation and the New Democrats. It does work. Republicans need to do this, but move the entire party there, not just campaigns. They'll find allies they never knew they had.

And frankly, they'll redeem their integrity and honor. They sullied themselves as much as anyone in this affair. Harry Reid and the Democrats weren't fighting for Democratic beliefs. They were fighting for Democracy as we know it in this country. They fought for all of us. If Republicans become the party of service... adopt positions to SERVE rather than whatever crazy schemes they want to inflict upon the country now... they will redeem themselves. And America will have the two modern political parties it deserves. And we will be much stronger as a country for it.

But none of that happens until their is accountability, starting with the takedown of the Tea Party.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure you are someone that can speak on behalf of the country.

I can read a poll, man. I know where you stand. I read polls that say Americans stand. And I know you don't believe in polls, but that's besides the point... reality exists independent of you.

Guess what? There isn't much overlap on the Venn diagram between you and polls. That's what I'm saying.

[Theinquisition]

Frankly, I think before we worry about winning 2016, we need to do some serious house cleaning. Losing the 2000 election was probably the best thing to ever happen to Democrats in retrospect (as a party). Desperation is the mother of invention as they say. From 2000 to 2008 they redesigned everything about their party and campaign and developed sophisticated technology and in-the-trenches political operations. Some of it was prototyped in 2004, but it came of age in 2008 and turned into this President-Generating Machine in 2012.

Republicans are years behind technologically and organizationally. Democrats aren't sitting still. They're improving their technology and their methods. They'll have new political weapons in 2016. It's honestly fine that they keep pioneering that stuff now. Republicans need to build up to it, but Democrats have a party that is very clearly the most united it's been since any moment in my life time. Fundamentally what Democrats did was modernize themselves, their positions, and their message.

Even the ACA is reflective of that. 15 years ago it would have been unthinkable for Democrats to do anything other than a Single Payer system. Instead they adopt what is factually a conservative sourced market based insurance reform plan. That's extraordinary. It's likely a bridge to a Single Payer system in the next 20 years, but the fact it became their core policy plan is remarkable.

We need to modernize. We need to throw the Tea Party people out. They need to go. They can go form a third party, and win some districts for a few cycles, but it'll taper off and they'll be the non-entities again that they very much need to be made.

The Tea Party, in their infinite stupidity, doesn't have the wisdom to look at what the American people say when asked. How do people define as conservative, but then say the social safety net is important and Obamacare based reforms are critical? How does that electorate overwhelmingly elect a man who pledged to raise taxes? It's because the big-government / small-government dichotomy is a stupid one that has been inflicted upon the American people. What Americans really want is EFFECTIVE government. Not too big. Not too small. A lean, mean, efficient machine.

Republicans should see the "Small Government" ground to the Tea Party. It's a stupid political place to be that cannot exist in a country with a rapidly aging population that will draw on Medicare and Medicaid like ever before. Republicans should Embrace "Efficient Government" as their mantra. Let Democrats be the party of Big Government. Let Republicans be the party of making sure that there are consequences when Pentagon contracts run 5 years behind and 300% over budget. Embrace comprehensive Immigration, Tax Code reform, and public investment. Don't "starve the beast". Invest smartly. Spend less on subsidies, more on scientific research and education.

If this sounds like Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats, that's essentially correct. And it works. She's by far the most successful elected leader in the world. And she governs just-right of center.

Bill Clinton did this, just left of center, with Triangulation and the New Democrats. It does work. Republicans need to do this, but move the entire party there, not just campaigns. They'll find allies they never knew they had.

And frankly, they'll redeem their integrity and honor. They sullied themselves as much as anyone in this affair. Harry Reid and the Democrats weren't fighting for Democratic beliefs. They were fighting for Democracy as we know it in this country. They fought for all of us. If Republicans become the party of service... adopt positions to SERVE rather than whatever crazy schemes they want to inflict upon the country now... they will redeem themselves. And America will have the two modern political parties it deserves. And we will be much stronger as a country for it.

But none of that happens until their is accountability, starting with the takedown of the Tea Party.

- - - Updated - - -



I can read a poll, man. I know where you stand. I read polls that say Americans stand. And I know you don't believe in polls, but that's besides the point... reality exists independent of you.

Guess what? There isn't much overlap on the Venn diagram between you and polls. That's what I'm saying.

Not a bad position to take, one I can agree with you on.

We agree on alot of things actually (except Gun-control ill never understand you on that one)

[Zaydin]

They're rogues. The world knows it. The world is talking about it. The world is concerned about it. And we dismiss that concern at our own peril. They indulged the quirkiness of a political system this time. They will not indulge us next time. But the fact we even got to this point, that needs to be on the head of the Tea Party. It is all their fault. They picked this fight. They got so obsessed with Obamacare, they didn't stop to think about the Collateral Damage. In this case, it's going to take a couple years of good behavior on our part to win back international confidence.

*snip*

I think it was less the Tea Partiers in Congress didn't stop to think about the collateral damage and more that they didn't CARE about collateral damage. After all, while the sequester has without a doubt hurt the economy and slowed the recovery, it wasn't a visible disaster the way that the Obama administration and financial experts were warning, so the Tea Partiers figured that the warnings about the damage a shutdown and default would do to the nation was just the 'establishment' bluffing to try and scare people and turn them against the Tea Party.

The problem with the Tea Parties is that they've whipped themselves into such a frenzy, that I honestly think that they believe they are fighting a battle against evil (referring to the ACA specifically, and Obama/liberals in general) and for the future of America as they know it. When you have someone who fervently believes that what they are doing is good and righteous, there is no room for compromise in their minds.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them." - Barry Goldwater

While the quote was directed against the Religious Right, in many ways, the Tea Party shares a mindset with the Religious Right. When the Tea Party makes someone like Peter King, who made headlines with his extreme Islamaphobia over the last few years, look like a moderate in comparison, that should be a warning sign about just how insane the Tea Party has become.

And what should truly frighten everyone is that the Tea Party hasn't learned a damn thing from the clusterf@%k the last three weeks were; the True Believers in the House think that the fight they spent the last three weeks fighting was a good one, they don't regret flushing 24 billion dollars down the toilet, or costing the country 1.4% GDP growth this quarter (Or about 196 billion dollars, if the statistic I read is accurate), or putting nearly a million workers out of work for three weeks, or harming small businesses and our most vulnerable citizens, and that they are gearing up to repeat this mess in three to four months.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...rs-unrepentant

I quite honeslty hope that if the Tea Partiers in the House pull this again, that President Obama and the sane members of Congress finally get up and deliver the body blow to break the back of the Tea Party once and for all. I'm an ardent Democrat, but I want there to be a loyal opposition party; people who ensure that there is a civil and honest debate about the pressing issues for the country. One party rule is bad for the country; just look at how the Bush years turned out when Republicans controlled both Congress and the White House.

I desperately want to be able to say that while I can disagree with Republican policies, I can at least respect their position, but so long as the Tea Party has them by the throat and forcing them further to the right, I cannot say that; there is not a single thing right now that I can honestly say that I respect about Tea Party ideology.

[mvaliz]

I'm Confused, what exactly separates a extremist conservative from a normal conservative?

The ones who say "lets shut down the government and potentially cause the USA to default over healthcare reform" and the others who respond with "ummmm... isn't that a bit extreme? Perhaps there's another way?"

Kinda obvious, really...

[Trakanonn]

I have 0 respect for the Tea Party as a Libertarian. I am glad they formed, it helped win some seats, but now it may be doing more damage than good. Tea Party is the GOPs version of Libtards.

Ive said it before and I'll say it again - The Tea Party is Obama's biggest bailout.

[Yvaelle]

It looks like the fabricated fiscal crisis has cost the country $700 billion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/op...e.html?hp&_r=0
http://pgpf.org/special-reports/the-...-fiscal-policy

Fiscal conservatism.

Just to repeat this and put it in perspective, this is equivalent to the TARP bailouts that everybody flipped out at Obama for doing (even though had he not done it, the entire world economy would have collapsed under what-should-be-illegal bank practices).

There was literally zero upside to this money lost (TARP at least saved the world) - nobody gained anything here (well, apart from the democrats winning the 2016 presidential election 3 years ahead of time).

[Orbitus]

I have 0 respect for the Tea Party as a Libertarian. I am glad they formed, it helped win some seats, but now it may be doing more damage than good. Tea Party is the GOPs version of Libtards.

Ive said it before and I'll say it again - The Tea Party is Obama's biggest bailout.

How is the TEA party anything like a 'libtard' as you claim? There is Liberals Conservatives and the Tea Party. There really isn't anything in the Democratic party that is trying to destroy it like the tea party is to the Republicans.

[NewOrleansTrolley]

My only question is why did they start right when the democrats took office? Why didn't they start sooner? The tea party just seems like hypoterical talk to me. They certainly weren't for "smaller government" when Bush was in charge.

[Teriz]

My only question is why did they start right when the democrats took office? Why didn't they start sooner? The tea party just seems like hypoterical talk to me. They certainly weren't for "smaller government" when Bush was in charge.

1. Because after Bush, the Conservative movement was in the wilderness.
2. Because a Democrat won the election.
3. Because that Democrat happened to be a black guy.
4. Because a bunch of older white people think that the country they grew up in is changing (they're right).

[Deathcries]

1. Because after Bush, the Conservative movement was in the wilderness.
2. Because a Democrat won the election.
3. Because that Democrat happened to be a black guy.
4. Because a bunch of older white people think that the country they grew up in is changing (they're right).

1.Bush was not a conservative. He also had democrats in the house in senate for 6 years of his presidency. Why do you think Obama has amplified most of Bush's policies, and kept most of Bush's CIA, and federal reserve people in house.

2. People like me, cannot stand for corrupt liberal ideology that Bush, McCain, King, and Graham have done to hurt conservatism and what it means.

3. Republicans have black people too. Alfonzo Rachel, Allen West, Herman Cain, etc. Your just trying to bring up racism, and that card is seriously being overplayed. I remember when John Stewart and Colbert did their version of the Tea Party. Alfonzo went to that and it was truly hypocritical of the liberals to even make fun of Tea Party being racist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S0fluUaY60 <-----actual footage of the Colbert/John Stewarts rally.

4. It is changing. More people are becoming dependent off of others, and have that 'What can you do for me?" mentality. I see it on here and around the world, more and more people want to become dependent, rather than independent. I don't see how leeching off of others can make someone feel good, or make someone proud of themselves.

Take for small example if you have a guild on WOW. You have 9 really, really good players who want to achieve great things, but you have one really really bad player who doesn't want to contribute, just down right sucks, and just doesn't care. You think the other guild members are going to keep him, and are just going to carry him/her?

Problem with leeching off of others and being irresponsible is eventually you're going to end up with no one being responsible. Problem with socialism is you'll eventually run out of other people's money.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to repeat this and put it in perspective, this is equivalent to the TARP bailouts that everybody flipped out at Obama for doing (even though had he not done it, the entire world economy would have collapsed under what-should-be-illegal bank practices).

There was literally zero upside to this money lost (TARP at least saved the world) - nobody gained anything here (well, apart from the democrats winning the 2016 presidential election 3 years ahead of time).

Bush was actually responsible for TARP. Not Obama. That was a Bush deal.

[Yvaelle]

Bush was actually responsible for TARP. Not Obama. That was a Bush deal.

It was planned during the last two months Bush was in office, yes - but that didn't stop the Right from mauling Obama for following through with it - none of the money went out until Obama was in office. So I didn't mean to suggest it was his inception - but he certainly took the 'blame' for it (despite it ultimately being an absolutely necessary thing to do).

For those interested, it's been paid off with (albeit trivial) interest now - whereas the money lost via this shutdown/default threat will never be regained.

[Teriz]

1.Bush was not a conservative. He also had democrats in the house in senate for 6 years of his presidency. Why do you think Obama has amplified most of Bush's policies, and kept most of Bush's CIA, and federal reserve people in house.

Bush was a conservative. Conservatives simply disowned him at the end of his presidency because he was an awful president. Before that, he had the full support of the conservative movement.

2. People like me, cannot stand for corrupt liberal ideology that Bush, McCain, King, and Graham have done to hurt conservatism and what it means.

Yet the conservative movement fully supported both McCain and Romney for president. Hypocrisy is a strong suit in modern conservatism.

3. Republicans have black people too. Alfonzo Rachel, Allen West, Herman Cain, etc. Your just trying to bring up racism, and that card is seriously being overplayed. I remember when John Stewart and Colbert did their version of the Tea Party. Alfonzo went to that and it was truly hypocritical of the liberals to even make fun of Tea Party being racist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S0fluUaY60 <-----actual footage of the Colbert/John Stewarts rally.

The card isn't being overplayed. There's a reason every minority group in general vote democratic in overwhelming numbers, and its because Republicans (and especially the Tea Party) have done nothing but push minorities away with their race-baiting nonsense. Unless of course you're saying that every minority group in the country just doesn't "get" the conservative movement, and overwhelmingly vote democrat because they've been bamboozled.

4. It is changing. More people are becoming dependent off of others, and have that 'What can you do for me?" mentality. I see it on here and around the world, more and more people want to become dependent, rather than independent. I don't see how leeching off of others can make someone feel good, or make someone proud of themselves.

Nonsense. People need more help because the global economy is in recovery. Unless we want to send millions of people into poverty, centralized governments need to assist their people. We did the same thing 80 years ago during the Great Depression, because we saw that when governments didn't (or couldn't) step in to assist their people, those governments collapsed and became totalitarian dictatorships (see Russia, Germany, and Japan c. 1930s).

[Deathcries]

Bush was a conservative. Conservatives simply disowned him at the end of his presidency because he was an awful president. Before that, he had the full support of the conservative movement.



Yet the conservative movement fully supported both McCain and Romney for president. Hypocrisy is a strong suit in modern conservatism.



The card isn't being overplayed. There's a reason every minority group in general vote democratic in overwhelming numbers, and its because Republicans (and especially the Tea Party) have done nothing but push minorities away with their race-baiting nonsense. Unless of course you're saying that every minority group in the country just doesn't "get" the conservative movement, and overwhelmingly vote democrat because they've been bamboozled.



Nonsense. People need more help because the global economy is in recovery. Unless we want to send millions of people into poverty, centralized governments need to assist their people. We did the same thing 80 years ago during the Great Depression, because we saw that when governments didn't (or couldn't) step in to assist their people, those governments collapsed and became totalitarian dictatorships (see Russia, Germany, and Japan c. 1930s).

1. Bush was not a conservative, he was a RINO. He never had full support of the republican party, or at least none of the Conservatives I know. So you must think Obama is awful to because he's kept most of Bush's policies intact.

2. I voted libertarian. Most Conservatives I know just stayed home. McCain and Romney were no different than Bush or Obama. You're listening to MSM too much.

3. Card is seriously being overplayed. There was a republican who's words I stand by. "Judge a man not by the color of his skin, but by the character of his persons." You're making people slaves to the .gov, and buying people's votes by handing out free shit.

4. Economy recovery? Insurance rates are going up for most of the middle class. Gas is higher than it's ever been. Food products are at a high. We keep putting a strain on small business. Please show me where this recovery is because it sure passed America by.

Russia, Germany, and Japan had a ton of money, they were super powers taking over territories. They were socialist/communist countries who didn't care less about people or human beings in general. They had the money, but they spent it on other things but the people.

- - - Updated - - -

It was planned during the last two months Bush was in office, yes - but that didn't stop the Right from mauling Obama for following through with it - none of the money went out until Obama was in office. So I didn't mean to suggest it was his inception - but he certainly took the 'blame' for it (despite it ultimately being an absolutely necessary thing to do).

For those interested, it's been paid off with (albeit trivial) interest now - whereas the money lost via this shutdown/default threat will never be regained.

The right went after Bush's TARP and they went after Obama's Stimulus plan which hasn't stimulated anything accept CEO's and .gov's wallets.

Most of you guys don't even understand what a Tea Party person truly is much less what a Conservative is.

We don't trust people in power or both sides of the fence. We elect people to work for us. Not for themselves. People like Ted Cruz is doing exactly what we've elected him to do. That's why he's in there, and will continue to stay in there. I don't see how you guys trust .gov so much, they've been known to screw people over throughout History yet people still cling to .gov like it's their bibles. What's the addiction?

[NYC17]

Take for small example if you have a guild on WOW. You have 9 really, really good players who want to achieve great things, but you have one really really bad player who doesn't want to contribute, just down right sucks, and just doesn't care. You think the other guild members are going to keep him, and are just going to carry him/her?

Problem with leeching off of others and being irresponsible is eventually you're going to end up with no one being responsible. Problem with socialism is you'll eventually run out of other people's money.

- - - Updated - - -



Bush was actually responsible for TARP. Not Obama. That was a Bush deal.

Ugh, this thought process...

The country doesn't become stronger by making people fend for themselves. They aren't the weak link, you are. America isn't being held back by people who can't or won't help themselves. It's being held back by people like you who wish to pretend they don't exist, and believe that's an acceptable position for a supposedly advanced society to hold.

Most people understand who is responsible for TARP. Unfortunately basic knowledge isn't a requirement for Tea Partiers.

[Cthulhu 2020]

The Tea Party is just flat out delusional. I know that term gets thrown around a lot here so it's kinda lost its meaning, but they really have constructed a little false reality that is all their own. Their principles are founded in nothing more than free market children's stories that could never work in real life (kind of communists). Their confidence in themselves is based on a voting block of Americans who vote for who they're told to vote for, not what these people actually want or need. And they actually believe that going further to a political extreme (which is shown to scare people away) is the way to "revive the party" and "get more votes". They think people aren't voting (R) because R is perceived as weak. These are only a few of their delusions. They've jumped down the rabbit hole, and need to be purged from the party.

As Skroe said, Republicans need to get rid of these extremists and run on a ticket of government efficiency. If we got a strong, moderate right party, I'd vote for them in a heart beat, but these extremists are too much to stomach.

Also, to address a point that's been brought up many times but people seem to miss...

MMO-C may have a left-leaning audience, of course it does, it's largely euro, but to blame that on why you got banned rather than manning up to your insult filled attack rant is just sad. Civil discussion is welcome, and if you can't get your point across without it, it should be obvious your opinion has very little basis in reality.

[Teriz]

1. Bush was not a conservative, he was a RINO. He never had full support of the republican party, or at least none of the Conservatives I know. So you must think Obama is awful to because he's kept most of Bush's policies intact.

Bush was only a RINO when he left office. While he was in office, every conservative outlet bent over backwards defending him. Where was the massive conservative hatred of Bush during his presidency?

Obama has applied Bush's policies in a much more rational and intelligent fashion. That's why things are better now than they were when Obama took office in 2009.

2. I voted libertarian. Most Conservatives I know just stayed home. McCain and Romney were no different than Bush or Obama. You're listening to MSM too much.

You were in the stark minority;

http://www.cato.org/blog/poll-shows-...bertarian-vote

Most libertarians voted for Romney.

3. Card is seriously being overplayed. There was a republican who's words I stand by. "Judge a man not by the color of his skin, but by the character of his persons." You're making people slaves to the .gov, and buying people's votes by handing out free shit.

Nice side track. However, my point still stands; If the conservatives and tea party isn't racist, then why do the overwhelming majority of every minority group vote Democrat? This includes Asian Americans who have the highest median income in the country.

4. Economy recovery? Insurance rates are going up for most of the middle class. Gas is higher than it's ever been. Food products are at a high. We keep putting a strain on small business. Please show me where this recovery is because it sure passed America by.

That isn't even worth responding to. Anyone with common sense would admit that the country is on much better footing now than it was in January of 2009.

Russia, Germany, and Japan had a ton of money, they were super powers taking over territories. They were socialist/communist countries who didn't care less about people or human beings in general. They had the money, but they spent it on other things but the people.

Uh when? Germany was pretty much bankrupt after WW1. So much so that Germans were burning their money to keep themselves warm. Japan became bankrupt in the late 1920s, and the military took over. Russia became bankrupt during WW1, and the communists took over, deposing the monarchy.

When the U.S. economy collapsed in 1929, the government took action and pushed out numerous government programs to help its people, with varying results. When WW2 began, the government established even more government programs to help Americans at home, and those serving. Part of the boom that occurred in the 1950s was the result of the government giving out home loans and college loans to returning WW2 veterans. The idea that people are struggling and needing government assistance is something unprecedented and new is demonstratively false. Its happened numerous times throughout U.S. history.

We established government to be there for us in times of need, and fortunately we had progressives in power at those times of need to get our country through the hard times. That's the role of a centralized government. When government is no longer capable of doing that, that government collapses and a new one takes its place.

[Zamfix]

The problem is the Tea Party movement has been hijacked by social conservatives.

I agree with a very small amount of core Tea Party ideals, mostly regarding taxation. Aside from that, anecodotally, Tea Partiers I've talked to have a dream of a Libertarian fantasyland where the rich can hire private militias to keep their compounds safe from the unwashed masses who are poor through no other reason than their own mental deficiencies.