Its Palin 2, the sequel!

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

She is not the tea party, she was a republican candidate. She was backed by the tea party. I said the media is trying to link the tea party to the right wing. Yes - O'Donell may be right wing, but the tea party is not (see other thread).

OK. again, if the tea party is NOT right wing, WHY do they keep backing right wing candidates? Show me an example of them backing a 'left wing' candidate, if it is just about supporting non-mainstream candidates across the country.

OK, Scott Brown, GREAT example. now he is wandering to the middle, as forecasted by many and he is getting BEAT on by people in the republican party who wanted him to be further right that he is.

as far as the media, is this different than the two days of Alvin Greene nonsense had. I think they go for the potential train wreck on either side. I'm just arguing that the Tea party, by their backing the candidates they have, has linked them to the "right wing'

She is woefully underqualified, a decent looking women with a history of talking out against whacking off! She is "news worthy" like a blooper reel waiting to happen.

if she was a middle aged, reasonably well spoken male, tea party backed candidate, she probably wouldn't get the press she is (see the race in Alaska recently) where was the front page ad naseum CNN coverage of that win linking the Tea Party to the 'far right'?

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

She is woefully underqualified, a decent looking women with a history of talking out against whacking off! She is "news worthy" like a blooper reel waiting to happen.

if she was a middle aged, reasonably well spoken male, tea party backed candidate, she probably wouldn't get the press she is (see the race in Alaska recently) where was the front page ad naseum CNN coverage of that win linking the Tea Party to the 'far right'?

newsworthy or influence worthy?
Its a sham. Its the Palin attack plan. But the funny thing is, as much as Palin was proved to be a moron, look how much influence she has. I would think Americans might care what O'Donnell has to say in a debate vs. her comments on "Politcially Incorrect" which is a comedy issues debate. If she wasnt entertaining, she would not have gotten the gig.
I also love when "right wing" candidates get blasted for speaking out on sex. I wonder what Biden, a good catholic thinks about pre-marital sex and masturbation? I was a Catholic for years, both of those (2 of my favorite things) were big, big, big no nos for Catholics. So is she really wacky? Or are all Catholics hypocrates?

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

I also love when "right wing" candidates get blasted for speaking out on sex. I wonder what Biden, a good catholic thinks about pre-marital sex and masturbation? I was a Catholic for years, both of those (2 of my favorite things) were big, big, big no nos for Catholics. So is she really wacky? Or are all Catholics hypocrates?

I think most are hypocrites, or choose not to follow parts of their faith. As a severely lapsed catholic (Agnostic now) I think the church is woefully out of touch anyways.

I think she is amusing, but her record of lying about her past and financial ineptitude in her personal life is going to bite her in the ass.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

I think most are hypocrites, or choose not to follow parts of their faith. As a severely lapsed catholic (Agnostic now) I think the church is woefully out of touch anyways.

I think she is amusing, but her record of lying about her past and financial ineptitude in her personal life is going to bite her in the ass.

sounds like she is more qualified for Geithners job.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

but her record of lying about her past and financial ineptitude in her personal life is going to bite her in the ass.

That's funny that it will hurt her chances, when in reality it's the thing she has most in common with the members who currently hold office.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

OK. again, if the tea party is NOT right wing, WHY do they keep backing right wing candidates? Show me an example of them backing a 'left wing' candidate, if it is just about supporting non-mainstream candidates across the country.

show me a "left wing" candidate that identifies with the Tea Party principles? it's not "just about supporting non-mainstream candidates"..there are a set of principles that are common to Tea Party goers that happen not to be likely shared with "left-wing" candidates...I know, I know...it's not FAIR....but...this isn't really that complicated...thought you were supposed to be smart or maybe just "woefully underqualified"? ?

also...there are an equal number of dem and rep cadidates...let me know when the lamestream media begins an in-depth anal exam of a democrat candidate anywhere...

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by scottw

show me a "left wing" candidate that identifies with the Tea Party principles? it's not "just about supporting non-mainstream candidates"..there are a set of principles that are common to Tea Party goers that happen not to be likely shared with "left-wing" candidates...I know, I know...it's not FAIR....but...this isn't really that complicated...thought you were supposed to be smart or maybe just "woefully underqualified"? ?

also...there are an equal number of dem and rep cadidates...let me know when the lamestream media begins an in-depth anal exam of a democrat candidate anywhere...

I don't give a %$%$%$%$ if it is fair and have had a pretty consitant position that the influence of the Tea Party in a general election is over stated. If Martha Coakley had run a halfway decent campaign, or had a frigging personality, it would have swung the otherway, Tea Party or not.


RIJ is stating that the Tea Party is being unfairly labeled 'right wing' but by your definition above, it sure sounds it. My point was simply that they are labled 'right' b/c the ARE 'right'

I'm going fishing. go do what O'Donnell says she doesn't do while looking at her picture Scott

[striperman36]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

If Martha Coakley had run a halfway decent campaign, or had a frigging personality, it would have swung the otherway, Tea Party or not.

She has a personality, it showed!! Second time she had the wrong campaign people. She must of offshored her campaign advice

She's never won an election in her life

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

RIJ is stating that the Tea Party is being unfairly labeled 'right wing' but by your definition above, it sure sounds it. My point was simply that they are labled 'right' b/c the ARE 'right'

I'm going fishing. go do what O'Donnell says she doesn't do while looking at her picture Scott

thought I was on your "ignore" list?

unfairly labeled "right wing" as a pejorative which indicates racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe Nazis as has been vioced by many democrat legislators and countless "left wing" pundints and media types...the fact is that the Tea Party is made up with people across the political spectrum and much to the dismay of the left, appeals to and includes a lot of the "center" with the values that they espouse...you and the "media" HAVE DEFINED THE CANDIDATES THAT THEY SUPPORT AS "RIGHT WING OR FAR RIGHT".....your point of view is obviously different of that from the Tea Party faithful when it comes to labeling and what constitutes the "center", the left and lamestream media likes to fancy the center or moderates as anyone that agrees with them most of the time......as usual, the people who should be happy that the Tea Party is destroying the republican chances to win in November are the most bothered by it....don't you want the dems to continue to control congress and Obama to continue to implement his policies??? you and others here and nationally should be enthusiastically rooting for the Tea Party to support so-called "unelectable fringe right candidates"

please go back and read the Tea Party list of values posted earlier and tell me how those are explicitly "right wing" and then show me a "left wing" candidate that can espouse those values...


Posted by John R
Five Core Principles on its website.
1. Limited Government
2. Fiscal Responsibility
3. Personal Responsibility
4. The Rule of Law
5. National Sovereignty

Can a "Liberal" or "Progressive" please find for me the Extremeism or Right Wing in the above?


the Tea Party is simply backing the candidate that most closely represents these principles which are foreign to the lamestream media and much of the left but very AMERICAN...if the democrats, lamestream media and "left wing" are going to support and run "bearded Marxist" (or unbearded in the case of Obama) candidates...perhaps the center isn't at all where they imagine it to be...

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

the Tea Party is simply backing the candidate that most closely represents these principles which are foreign to the lamestream media and much of the left but very AMERICAN...if the democrats, lamestream media and "left wing" are going to support and run "bearded Marxist" (or unbearded in the case of Obama) candidates...perhaps the center isn't at all where they imagine it to be...

And can you explain how O'Donnell is better enabled to demonstrate these principals than Mike Castle who the Tea Party chose not to back? We do know that Castle isn't squeaky clean, he did have that incident where he stood up to a "Birther" during a town hall.

The numbers clearly show that Mike Castle was likely going to win the mid-term election and gain a valuable Senate seat for the GOP.

According to a FOX News poll, as of yesterday, Coons leads O'Donnell 54 to 39 while Castle would be leading Coons by the same margin had he won the primary.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2010/sep/21/coons-crushes-odonnell-new-delaware-senate-poll/

If the Tea Party is really serious about reigning in government spending, one would think that early control of the House or Senate would be the highest priority. Control of either side is not a gimme, and in two more years the damage that could be done by Obama is staggering.

Instead they try to ride the anti-incumbent wave with a Palin look-a-like and back a candidate with little experience and views that are much further to the right than the usual demographics of the Delaware voters.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

And can you explain how O'Donnell is better enabled to demonstrate these principals than Mike Castle who the Tea Party chose not to back?
The numbers clearly show that Mike Castle was likely going to win the mid-term election and gain a valuable Senate seat for the GOP.

-spence

Clearly was not desirable as a representative of those values for the senate, guess they didn't want to hold their nose and support a Rino like Castle who was not going to demonstrate any of their principles....we'll see in the general if it was a good move or a bad move...should they pick the schmuck just because he is a guaranteed win?...
he's(Castle) shown his true colors after the defeat... the same guy that lectured that the party and candidates should support any republican over any democrat in the general in a speech a while back....FRAUD apparently this applied to everyone but him....

The social creed was once the philosophy of rebels against established order; but, as Lionel Trilling long ago showed, it has become inseparable from a vision of power and mastery. The social idealist, Trilling said in 1948, is one “who takes license from his ideals for the unrestrained exercise of power.” The “ultimate threat to human freedom,” he wrote in a sympathetic account of George Orwell’s thought, could well come from a “massive development of the social idealism of our democratic culture.”


John Henry Newman, when he led the Anglo-Catholic Oxford Movement that shook the Church of England in the 1830s, went so far as to argue that naïve enthusiasm is more valuable, in reform movements, than the sophisticated tactical expediency that finds its “beau idéal” in “safe, sound, sensible men,” and in “a timid cautious course” charted by “second rate” characters “with low views” and “tame dull” ideas.

Newman conceded that the enthusiastic naïf is likely to have his foibles. But while “incidentally faulty in mode or language,” he is “still peculiarly effective.” The “very faults” of such an individual “excite attention; he loses, but his cause, if good, and he powerful minded, gains . . .”


and again...if what you say is in fact true, you should be thrilled, your hero will keep the Senate and continue with his agenda......but you should really focus more on your team as they really seem to be the ones in big trouble...

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

Clearly was not desirable as a representative of those values for the senate, guess they didn't want to hold their nose and support a Rino like Castle who was not going to demonstrate any of their principles....we'll see in the general if it was a good move or a bad move...should they pick the schmuck just because he is a guaranteed win?...

How does siding with the Dems on some votes make you a Rino? I reviewed his voting history and he certainly has voted with the GOP on a majority of significant bills.

I thought the GOP was a "big tent" party. I guess if you don't tow the party line you're not really a member

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

-. Control of either side is not a gimme, and in two more years the damage that could be done by Obama is staggering.

-spence

Spence, can you clarify for me?..Is this Spence speaking in this statement or are you channeling aTea Party member or someone else ?

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

Spence, can you clarify for me?..Is this Spence speaking in this statement or are you channeling aTea Party member or someone else ?

I just threw that in to give you a little chub.

-spence