Well Played, Sirs And Ma'ams

in wisconsin, russ feingold, the only senator to vote against the patriot act, is almost certain to lose his seat in the senate. his opponent? a man who opposed eliminating the statute of limitations for victims of child abuse, does not think the 14th amendment applies to gay americans, and took over $4 million in government subsidies and federal grants for his business (although naturally, as a tea partier, criticizes government subsidies).

in colorado, michael bennet, who has been endorsed by russ feingold, is losing a tough fight against ken buck, who believes that if your wife were raped by her uncle, she should be forced by the government to carry that child to term. he also believes in privatizing the va, keeping openly gay soldiers out of the military, has faced ethics violations in the us attorny's office, and thinks wearing high heels is a liability for a senator.

in nevada, harry reid is in the race of his life against a tea partier and christian reconstructionist who advises second amendment remedies against the government, who thinks flouridizaion of our water is a commie plot to kill americans, wants medicare and ss privatized, does not think the constitution calls for separation of church and state, opposses abortion even in cases of rape or incest, thinks unemployment insurance 'spoils' lazy drug-addicted americans, has hinted at prohibition of alcohol, called the $20 billion BP fund for victims a 'slush fund', and wants to dump nuclear waste in yucca mountain.

in pennsylvania, three-star vice admiral joe sestak is all but assured to losing his race to a wall street insider who made his wealth on derivatives trading and voted for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage (because clearly the 14th amendment should not apply to gay americans )

in alaska, the senate seat is sure to be won by a man who thinks unemployment insurance is unconstitutional, wants to eliminate the minimum wage, and believes that if your daughter is raped by her uncle, the government should force her to carry to term.

in kentucky, the senate seat is sure to be won by a man who wants to revisit civil rights, also believes that your daughter should be forced by the government to carry to term if she was raped by her uncle, proposed an underground electrical fece to fight illegal immigration, and wants to repeal birthright citizenship under the 14th amendment.

now, this is quite the group of candidates poised for victory. but, where is all the attention being focused currently?

this idiot...

WASHINGTON — Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell of Delaware said in a 2006 debate that China was plotting to take over America and claimed to have classified information about the country that she couldn't divulge.
O'Donnell's comments came as she and two other Republican candidates debated U.S. policy on China during Delaware's 2006 Senate primary, which O'Donnell ultimately lost.
She said China had a "carefully thought out and strategic plan to take over America" and accused one opponent of appeasement for suggesting that the two countries were economically dependent and should find a way to be allies.
"That doesn't work," she said. "There's much I want to say. I wish I wasn't privy to some of the classified information that I am privy to."
"A country that forces women to have abortions and mandates that you can only have one child and will not allow you the freedom to read the Bible, you think they can be our friend?" she asked. "We have to look at our history and realize that if they pretend to be our friend it's because they've got something up their sleeve."
O'Donnell's campaign didn't respond Monday to requests for comment.
At the debate, opponent Jan Ting countered that China has the potential to become a more democratic country and an important ally.
"I think our China policy has to be handled very carefully," Ting said. "We have the capability of making an enemy or a friend out of China."
When Ting challenged O'Donnell's claim about having secret information, O'Donnell didn't answer specifically but suggested she had received it through nonprofit groups she worked with that frequently sent missionaries there.

Click to expand...

i have been pondering this for a while, and i have decided that this was a strategic move by the right. they decided to give up delaware in order to have an easier shot at the other states i listed by drawing attention away from them. it just makes too much sense at this point to be anything but.


[video=youtube;ek3OUay2uWw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek3OUay2uWw[/video]

ms. o'donnell, i served with me, i knew me, i was a good friend of mine. ms. o'donnell, you are NO me.

She isn't as good looking as me.

They are preying on the uneducated and uninformed....they ALL avoid ANY kind of interview w/ anyone except Conservative radio and Fox News. If someone isnt concerned enough to read and investigate these people, they would have no idea about some of their radical views

They dont publicize their socially conservative views because they KNOW it will cost them votes. They wail on about how the Dems. are "radical" I see their extreme Christian based views to be much more "radical".

Funny how the same group of idiots that screams about "keep govt. out of my business" wants to grant the Govt. control over every woman's uterus, wants to ban birth control and opposes gay marriage. LOL thank God they wanna keep Govt. "overreach" and "interference" to a minimum.
Dumb, angry hypocrites.

The sad part is they will win some seats, decide they've been given a "mandate" by the people and go WAAAAAAAAY too far. They will be 1 term losers and will end setting their cause back at least 1 election cycle.

These individuals wouldn't understand freedom if it slapped then across the face. Their freedom is similar to that you see on a TV or print advertisement; it comes with an asterisk that asks you to read the fine print at the bottom. And it it is there that you find out it only applies to white, christians, those that believe in the same values and morals as theirs, and so on.

Like Bill Clinton said, they're pawns in a game where they'll be used while under the impression that all is going well for them. They get what they believe to be their "social" freedom, but they'll continue to be screwed economically.

i really feel the surprise nomination of o'donnell was about the best thing that could have happened to the republicans. she draws attention away from closer races like wisconsin, nevada, and colorado where they have morons like buck, johnson, and angle on the ticket.

it will be a really sad statement on the state of politics if the only senator to vote against the patriot act loses his race to an unknown tea partier who opposes the same government subsdies that he once took and opposes eliminating the statute of limitations for victims of child abuse.

The Left have fucked up so royally bad that these righties seem like a better alternative, that doesn't say a lot for the Democrats.

Same song different day

fitch303 said:

The Left have fucked up so royally bad that these righties seem like a better alternative, that doesn't say a lot for the Democrats.

Click to expand...

are you sure about that?

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 - royal fuck up, unless you are a woman facing discriminatory pay practices.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program - royal fuck up, unless you are working poor and have children who need health care.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - royal fuck up, unless you are one of the millions living off meager unemployment insurance, or a veteran receiving disability, or a senior receiving SS, or you are unemployed and need COBRA, or a teacher whose job would have been slashed, or a police officer whose job would have been slashed, or a student who got a college credit, or you don't like getting an extra $400 from the Making Work Pay tax credit, or a homeowner who dislikes getting a $1300 refund for updating certain appliances.
The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 - royal fuck up, unless you like the shady shit your credit card company pulls off.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - royal fuck up, unless you like cancer or children smoking cigarettes.
The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment - royal fuck up, unless you are a business that wants a tax break or a laid-off worker who enjoys bein unemployed.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - royal fuck up, unless you want your kid with pre-existing conditions or yourself to get health insurance, or like preventative care covered, or you are a senior who got a $250 check to cover the donut hole in medicare part , or you dislike the annual cap on your health insurance, or you dislike being dropped once you get sick, or...well, there are just too many good provisions to go on. but you get the idea.


seriously dude, don't just sit there and say 'they royally fucked up', tell us why.

the fact that you can't even support your assertions does not say a lot for YOU.

edit - i was going to ask you to extol the virtues of ron johnson over russ feingold, or ken buck over michael bennet, or sharron angle over harry reid, but you seem like too much of a mental lightweight to even try....but please, do comment on the specific candidates in these races if you can. it should be amusing.

UncleBuck said:

are you sure about that?

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 - royal fuck up, unless you are a woman facing discriminatory pay practices.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program - royal fuck up, unless you are working poor and have children who need health care.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - royal fuck up, unless you are one of the millions living off meager unemployment insurance, or a veteran receiving disability, or a senior receiving SS, or you are unemployed and need COBRA, or a teacher whose job would have been slashed, or a police officer whose job would have been slashed, or a student who got a college credit, or you don't like getting an extra $400 from the Making Work Pay tax credit, or a homeowner who dislikes getting a $1300 refund for updating certain appliances.
The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 - royal fuck up, unless you like the shady shit your credit card company pulls off.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - royal fuck up, unless you like cancer or children smoking cigarettes.
The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment - royal fuck up, unless you are a business that wants a tax break or a laid-off worker who enjoys bein unemployed.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - royal fuck up, unless you want your kid with pre-existing conditions or yourself to get health insurance, or like preventative care covered, or you are a senior who got a $250 check to cover the donut hole in medicare part , or you dislike the annual cap on your health insurance, or you dislike being dropped once you get sick, or...well, there are just too many good provisions to go on. but you get the idea.


seriously dude, don't just sit there and say 'they royally fucked up', tell us why.

the fact that you can't even support your assertions does not say a lot for YOU.

edit - i was going to ask you to extol the virtues of ron johnson over russ feingold, or ken buck over michael bennet, or sharron angle over harry reid, but you seem like too much of a mental lightweight to even try....but please, do comment on the specific candidates in these races if you can. it should be amusing.

Click to expand...

you forgot to mention they are all paid for with magic dollars. similar to geoffrey dollars only not worth as much.

jeff f said:

you forgot to mention they are all paid for with magic dollars. similar to geoffrey dollars only not worth as much.

Click to expand...

woops, i forgot this one...

The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, Title I of Pub.L. 111-139, H.J.Res. 45, is a public law passed during the 111th United States Congress and signed by President Barack Obama. The act reinstated pay-as-you-go budgeting rules used in Congress from 1990 until 2002, ensuring that most new spending is offset by spending cuts or added revenue elsewhere.

funny how none of this deficit hawking was going on while the real damage was being done. but i bet YOU were different. i bet YOU were bitching and moaning when we went to war in iraq, right alongside our current commander in chief. i bet YOU were pissing venom when they passed the bush tax cuts for the wealthy, adding a shit ton to our budget. i bet YOU single handedly formed the tea party in response to this, but for some reason waited until a democrat got into the white house.

also, you forget to mention how most of this will SAVE those magic dollars in the long run. are you mentally capable of differentiating between an INVESTMENT and SPENDING?

nice comeback.

UncleBuck said:

woops, i forgot this one...

The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, Title I of Pub.L. 111-139, H.J.Res. 45, is a public law passed during the 111th United States Congress and signed by President Barack Obama. The act reinstated pay-as-you-go budgeting rules used in Congress from 1990 until 2002, ensuring that most new spending is offset by spending cuts or added revenue elsewhere.

funny how none of this deficit hawking was going on while the real damage was being done. but i bet YOU were different. i bet YOU were bitching and moaning when we went to war in iraq, right alongside our current commander in chief. i bet YOU were pissing venom when they passed the bush tax cuts for the wealthy, adding a shit ton to our budget. i bet YOU single handedly formed the tea party in response to this, but for some reason waited until a democrat got into the white house.

also, you forget to mention how most of this will SAVE those magic dollars in the long run. are you mentally capable of differentiating between an INVESTMENT and SPENDING?

nice comeback.

Click to expand...

so you are saying the govt is going to save ME money? blahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahhhhahahahhahahaahahhahhahahahahahahhahhahahhahahahahahahahhha

yes, they have a long track record of doing that.

can anyone say post office?

when i dream i see rainbows, unicorns and midgets all playing nicely together....

edit btw, i bitched like a mofo when bush passed no child left behind and this latest medicare prescription debacle. i am consistant on this issue. the private sector does it better than govt....everytime.

UncleBuck said:

are you sure about that?

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 - royal fuck up, unless you are a woman facing discriminatory pay practices.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program - royal fuck up, unless you are working poor and have children who need health care.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - royal fuck up, unless you are one of the millions living off meager unemployment insurance, or a veteran receiving disability, or a senior receiving SS, or you are unemployed and need COBRA, or a teacher whose job would have been slashed, or a police officer whose job would have been slashed, or a student who got a college credit, or you don't like getting an extra $400 from the Making Work Pay tax credit, or a homeowner who dislikes getting a $1300 refund for updating certain appliances.
The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 - royal fuck up, unless you like the shady shit your credit card company pulls off.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - royal fuck up, unless you like cancer or children smoking cigarettes.
The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment - royal fuck up, unless you are a business that wants a tax break or a laid-off worker who enjoys bein unemployed.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - royal fuck up, unless you want your kid with pre-existing conditions or yourself to get health insurance, or like preventative care covered, or you are a senior who got a $250 check to cover the donut hole in medicare part , or you dislike the annual cap on your health insurance, or you dislike being dropped once you get sick, or...well, there are just too many good provisions to go on. but you get the idea.


seriously dude, don't just sit there and say 'they royally fucked up', tell us why.

the fact that you can't even support your assertions does not say a lot for YOU.

edit - i was going to ask you to extol the virtues of ron johnson over russ feingold, or ken buck over michael bennet, or sharron angle over harry reid, but you seem like too much of a mental lightweight to even try....but please, do comment on the specific candidates in these races if you can. it should be amusing.

Click to expand...

The left has never passed any fucked up legislation?????? That's interesting. Common sense would seem to dictate that if it were only conservatives passing fucked up legislation, there would soon cease to be a "right". I know a lot of very intelligent people on the right. I know a lot of really intelligent people on the left. We still have 2 parties in this country for some reason. To be fair, why not post some fucked up legislation that liberals have passed?

doc111 said:

To be fair, why not post some fucked up legislation that liberals have passed?

Click to expand...

in my defense, i was rebutting someone.

but you can google '111th us congress wiki' and see everything they have passed. try to find the fucked up legislation...not sure there is much.

jeff f said:

so you are saying the govt is going to save ME money? blahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahhhhahahahhahahaahahhahhahahahahahahhahhahahhahahahahahahahhha

yes, they have a long track record of doing that.

can anyone say post office?

when i dream i see rainbows, unicorns and midgets all playing nicely together....

edit btw, i bitched like a mofo when bush passed no child left behind and this latest medicare prescription debacle. i am consistant on this issue. the private sector does it better than govt....everytime.

Click to expand...

did you work in 2008?

if so, you got $400 from the Making Work Pay tax credit.

boom, obama saved you money.

and who else will take your letter from NY to LA for less than $0.50? who, i ask, who?

funny how the tea party stayed in the woodwork during no child left behind, bush's medicare prescription debacle, two wars, unfunded tax cuts.....and so on and so forth. they just stayed oddly silent...until a democrat took the white house...and shrank government ( http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/19/obama-bush-spending-oped-cx_kh_0119hassett.html )

UncleBuck said:

did you work in 2008?

if so, you got $400 from the Making Work Pay tax credit.

boom, obama saved you money.

and who else will take your letter from NY to LA for less than $0.50? who, i ask, who?

funny how the tea party stayed in the woodwork during no child left behind, bush's medicare prescription debacle, two wars, unfunded tax cuts.....and so on and so forth. they just stayed oddly silent...until a democrat took the white house...and shrank government ( http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/19/obama-bush-spending-oped-cx_kh_0119hassett.html )

Click to expand...

Wow!!!!! is all I have to say to that obviously biased, op-ed piece!

We are getting off the main point of the OP and his topic. If you are supporting the Tea Party/GOP candidates mentioned in the OP's post, are you aware of and do you also support the following as they do:

1.The full federal ban on ALL abortions including those i the case of rape /incest
2. The privatization of Social Security and Medicare
3. There is no separation between church and state
4. federal ban on Gay Marriage
5. We as a nation are engaged in a Holy War w/ Islam, and are near the "end times"

the list could go on and on. My gripe isnt w/ the fiscal conservative slant the candidates have, its more that they carry a heavy, almost radical social conservatism to the table too. Im all for limited government, but most of the social issues they support are all too familiar. Its funny how Newt talks so much about how Sharia law is going to be imposed on us.

Maybe he's right, it's just gonna be a Christian version of it if these people have their way.

ink the world said:

We are getting off the main point of the OP and his topic. If you are supporting the Tea Party/GOP candidates mentioned in the OP's post, are you aware of and do you also support the following as they do:

1.The full federal ban on ALL abortions including those i the case of rape /incest
2. The privatization of Social Security and Medicare
3. There is no separation between church and state
4. federal ban on Gay Marriage
5. We as a nation are engaged in a Holy War w/ Islam, and are near the "end times"

the list could go on and on. My gripe isnt w/ the fiscal conservative slant the candidates have, its more that they carry a heavy, almost radical social conservatism to the table too. Im all for limited government, but most of the social issues they support are all too familiar. Its funny how Newt talks so much about how Sharia law is going to be imposed on us.

Maybe he's right, it's just gonna be a Christian version of it if these people have their way.

Click to expand...

lmao The Tea Party does not stand for this platform. To be sure all candidates do not agree on all the points. If you don't know what the Tea Party stands for, then ask. Don't make things up. Small government, reduce the debt.

What next? Are you going to call them racist or ask why they weren't around when Bush was President? First the issues of the Tea Party were ignored. Now people are making them up.

Parker said:

lmao The Tea Party does not stand for this platform.

Click to expand...

hahahahahahaahhahahahahahahahahahah

*catches breath*

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

funny how this has become a standard move for tea partiers.

"they do not represent what the tea party stands for"

yet for some reason, i am having a really tough time finding even a single teapublican candidate this year who is socially liberal in the least. i have no problem finding the extremists...in fact that is all the tea party has. right wing extremists that pay lip service to smaller government and reduced spending.

you can not say that this is not the tea party platform because these issues are uniform in ALL the tea party candidates so far.

care to answer WHY we heard nothing of the tea party while dubya was expanding the size of government and putting us up to our ears in debt? care to explain WHY not a single tea party candidate was around in 2004, or 2006, or 2008? please, just let me know....WHERE THE FUCK WAS THE TEA PARTY WHEN THE WORST OF IT WAS GOING ON? why the fuck did you guys all of a sudden come out of the woodwork with suc vehement hatred once a black democrat occupied the white house?

UncleBuck said:

hahahahahahaahhahahahahahahahahahah

*catches breath*

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

funny how this has become a standard move for tea partiers.

"they do not represent what the tea party stands for"

yet for some reason, i am having a really tough time finding even a single teapublican candidate this year who is socially liberal in the least. i have no problem finding the extremists...in fact that is all the tea party has. right wing extremists that pay lip service to smaller government and reduced spending.

you can not say that this is not the tea party platform because these issues are uniform in ALL the tea party candidates so far.

care to answer WHY we heard nothing of the tea party while dubya was expanding the size of government and putting us up to our ears in debt? care to explain WHY not a single tea party candidate was around in 2004, or 2006, or 2008? please, just let me know....WHERE THE FUCK WAS THE TEA PARTY WHEN THE WORST OF IT WAS GOING ON? why the fuck did you guys all of a sudden come out of the woodwork with suc vehement hatred once a black democrat occupied the white house?

Click to expand...

It took ya longer to play the race card than I thought it would *yawn*. I don't speak for the tea partiers, republicans or democrats and none of them speaks for me. I speak for myself and when George W. Bush was doing fucked up shit, such as the Patriot Act, I WAS screaming about it! I wasn't a member here back then or you would've seen me be as critical of Baby Bush as I am of the "Messiah". Some people only see what they want to see I guess.

Parker said:

lmao The Tea Party does not stand for this platform. To be sure all candidates do not agree on all the points. If you don't know what the Tea Party stands for, then ask. Don't make things up. Small government, reduce the debt.

What next? Are you going to call them racist or ask why they weren't around when Bush was President? First the issues of the Tea Party were ignored. Now people are making them up.

Click to expand...

Whats next? LOL

I didnt make up a SINGLE thing, yeah they all stand for fiscal responsibility, but they ALL stand for some if not all of the things Ive listed.
Fact is they all support at least 3/4 of those points....for instance EVERY candidate listed supports the full ban of abortion. If you werent too lazy to actually learn about the candidates and the "movement" you so eager to defend you might not be defending them.



They are bullshitting you and others, and you are either too angry or too gullible to see it.
Cling to your guns and religion, I'll stick with the truth.