WizardofOz
New member
Yeah, if you're 12. Complaining about the use puts ones mentality at about the same level.
toldailytopic: What do you think of the Tea Party movement?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, if you're 12. Complaining about the use puts ones mentality at about the same level.
I've been leery of the Tea Party movement since finding out that the idea came from the Illinois Libertarian Party:
http://www.independentpoliticalrepo...antelli-the-idea-for-the-tax-day-tea-parties/
(Contrary to what Newman thinks, he's a rarity in the godless libertarian movement).
While I enjoy watching liberals wee wee in their panties at just the mention of the Tea Party; the ideologies of libertarianism and conservativism (the two ideologies that the Tea Party movement consists of) will eventually clash.
In order for the Tea Party to survive in the long run, they'll need to "shrug off Atlas":
"To this point, the arguments of Objectivism fit neatly with those prevalent in the Tea Party movement. Both hold the protection of individual rights to be the legitimate role of government. However, Biddle claimed this similarity is not enough. Asked during a question and answer session how the Tea Party might effectively advocate for capitalism, Biddle prescribed a shift in morality. The altruism promoted in the Judeo-Christian ethic is antithetical to the egoism inherent to capitalism, Biddle said.
It is crucial to note, by altruism, Biddle does not mean mere charity. By altruism, Biddle means “living for the other” in a sacrificial manner. Sacrifice for the “collective good” is the rallying call of the tyrant, Biddle said, citing examples in the rhetoric of Hitler among others. He claimed, as long as Tea Partiers “keep going to church on Sunday,” their morality will remain in conflict with their political objectives. This sentiment, acknowledged by Biddle as controversial, is indicative of a larger hostility in Objectivism toward religion."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2467041/posts
http://www.independentpoliticalrepo...antelli-the-idea-for-the-tax-day-tea-parties/
(Contrary to what Newman thinks, he's a rarity in the godless libertarian movement).
While I enjoy watching liberals wee wee in their panties at just the mention of the Tea Party; the ideologies of libertarianism and conservativism (the two ideologies that the Tea Party movement consists of) will eventually clash.
In order for the Tea Party to survive in the long run, they'll need to "shrug off Atlas":
"To this point, the arguments of Objectivism fit neatly with those prevalent in the Tea Party movement. Both hold the protection of individual rights to be the legitimate role of government. However, Biddle claimed this similarity is not enough. Asked during a question and answer session how the Tea Party might effectively advocate for capitalism, Biddle prescribed a shift in morality. The altruism promoted in the Judeo-Christian ethic is antithetical to the egoism inherent to capitalism, Biddle said.
It is crucial to note, by altruism, Biddle does not mean mere charity. By altruism, Biddle means “living for the other” in a sacrificial manner. Sacrifice for the “collective good” is the rallying call of the tyrant, Biddle said, citing examples in the rhetoric of Hitler among others. He claimed, as long as Tea Partiers “keep going to church on Sunday,” their morality will remain in conflict with their political objectives. This sentiment, acknowledged by Biddle as controversial, is indicative of a larger hostility in Objectivism toward religion."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2467041/posts
It is the public part and the liberal indoctrination the public schools want. You really didn't know that part?
WizardofOz
New member
aSeattleConserv rather than whine about the libertarian bogyman, tell us what about the tea party principles you find yourself at odds with.
Try not to cut n paste :thumb:
Try not to cut n paste :thumb:
worshippastor12
New member
Tea Party
Tea Party
Am I able to change my voter registration to "Tea Party" yet? Where do I sign up?
Tea Party
Am I able to change my voter registration to "Tea Party" yet? Where do I sign up?
ThePresbyteers
New member
This message is deleted and closed.
Last edited:
You're absolutely right about my cutting and pasting articles. Trying to get an atheist (or in your case "Other") to understand anything past one sentence is futile.
Being that the Tea Party was founded by the Libertarian Party, they will eventually get around to legislating their social platform. Let me see what "principles" I find myself at odds with:
I kinda sorta cringe when I think about 50 million unborn babies being murdered in the womb (99% done out of convenience) in a 37 year period. No plans on oveturning Roe v Wade (or in the case of Libertarian Ron Paul, the murdering of the unborn should be a "States rights issue").
I'm at odds with giving sexual deviants special rights and taking away legislation that prohibits their godless behavior.
Something about legalizing prostitution makes me think that Libertarians need a better "outlet" to spend their money on.
Legalizing the killing of the elderly (when grandpa is no longer of "use" to society, but his bank account is) or murdering oneself because it's "my body and I can damn well do with it as I please" makes me think that the sanctity of innocent life isn't a top priority in the Libertarian agenda (making money and spending it on hookers is).
The legalization of recreational drugs. (Like we don't already have enough substance abuse addicts when it's illegal).
Pornography, open borders, "free trade" with communist butchers, the Libertarian Party has it all.
http://www.lp.org/platform
WizardofOz
New member
Lazy and/or unimaginative I guess.
Or, trying to get you to post any original thought is nearly futile.
Don't get so hung up on labels. You seem to have a problem with that.
There are many, many tea "party" factions, often competing with one another. Did the Libertarians found them all?
Or, they can attempt to. Because that's how the process works in this country. One person can't get much done at all.
Ron Paul is as pro-life as they come and he feels that Roe v. Wade was an invalid ruling as this should be a state rights/authority issue per the Constitution. You are only perpetuating a lie by saying implying that Paul is anything less than pro-life. And actually, his plan to outlaw abortion would be much more effective than your federal one if you pro-lifers would just get your heads out of your rear ends.
source
It’s academic to talk about civil liberties if you don’t talk about the true protection of all life. So if you are going to protect liberty, you have to protect the life of the unborn just as well. I have a Bill in congress I certainly would promote and push as president, called the Sanctity of Life Amendment. We establish the principle that life begins at conception. And someone says, ‘oh why are you saying that?’ and I say, ‘well, that’s not a political statement -- that’s a scientific statement that I’m making!“ |
Guess what would happen if his Sanctity of Life Act passed? Just take a guess.
No overturn of a federal ruling necessary. You realize that's a long shot, don't you?
What tea party or tea party candidate (or Libertarian candidate) is asking for "special rights" for sexual deviants? :idunno:
What tea party or tea party candidate (or Libertarian candidate) is trying to legalize prostitution? :idunno:
| does Ron Paul want to legalize prostitution? No. He wants the States to deal with this question not the Federal Government. He is not advocating the national legalization of prostitution (something that CFRP could not support), but rather the removal of this subject matter from the Federal Court system to empower the States to deal with it. |
source
Tea party supporters/candidates want to kill the elderly?
Drug addiction is a medical problem not a criminal problem. Guess how much of our tax dollars go to housing addict in prison? Without medical help, they'll be back. They need counseling and therapy, not a soap-on-a-rope.
Your whole post is a composition fallacy/slippery slope fallacy. You do realize that, don't you?
Illogical thinking has you chasing your tail.
Because you don't do any of your own thinking.
Which Libertarian Party would that be? From what state? Can you name any founders of the Tea Party movement?
:yawn:
:yawn:
So when you think something should be legal that means you indulge in it. Oooooookay. So, do you smoke cigarettes?
Or maybe you're angry because if these things are legalized you won't be able to expose yourself to the kind of lifestyle you'd indulge in yourself and get paid to do it. Nice racket, officer.
Right: less for you guys to confiscate and then make disappear.
It seems I managed to help you have, what little intellect you possess, to think it through and say it better.
No, I do not like that 'granny' business, you :dunce:
Sarah Palin is pro-choice? What planet have you been living on?
She's no more pro-choice than the Pope. But at least she's not quite as extreme in her anti-choice views as the anti-abortion wackos in America. To them,any one who isn't as extreme as they are is "pro-abortion".
And she's not as homophobic as other right-wing wackos. But I still wouldn't vote for her under any circumstances,unless it was a choice between her and Hitler ,Stalin or Mao Zedong. But fortunately, that's not very likely. The Republican party has been hijacked by extremist reactionary neanderthal and thoecratic creeps who frighten the crap out of me and other sensible moderate liberals. And it's an insult to neanderthals to call these Puritanical jerks that, because the neanderthals were probably much nicer people, and much more intelligent.
And I would never vote for an anti-choice politician. So that rules Palin out, also the DINOS (democrats in name only) such as Bart Stupid,I mean Stupak.
She's no more pro-choice than the Pope. But at least she's not quite as extreme in her anti-choice views as the anti-abortion wackos in America. To them,any one who isn't as extreme as they are is "pro-abortion".
And she's not as homophobic as other right-wing wackos. But I still wouldn't vote for her under any circumstances,unless it was a choice between her and Hitler ,Stalin or Mao Zedong. But fortunately, that's not very likely. The Republican party has been hijacked by extremist reactionary neanderthal and thoecratic creeps who frighten the crap out of me and other sensible moderate liberals. And it's an insult to neanderthals to call these Puritanical jerks that, because the neanderthals were probably much nicer people, and much more intelligent.
And I would never vote for an anti-choice politician. So that rules Palin out, also the DINOS (democrats in name only) such as Bart Stupid,I mean Stupak.
She said she is personaly pro-life, meaning she would never do it, and that means she is administratively pro choice. I sure hope she thinks about this at some point. You must get your "news" from John Stewart.
http://prolifeprofiles.com/sarah
They worded differently what I said about personaly and publicly.
Do you think it is all misdirected?
Yeah, this "right vs wrong" thing really has me "hung up" (maybe I should hang around moral relativist atheists more often, they seem to have the answer for everything).
As shown in my earlier post, the idea was started by the IL Libertarian Party. Since the word Libertarian has the same stench as that of atheist, they decided to take another route and attempt to fool the public with another name. Unfortunate for them, some conservatives got involved, hence the different factions.
Tea Party Patriots is one of the largest Tea Party movements (boasting 50,000 registered members). It doesn't take much research to see that they've got Libertarian Party written all over them.
http://www.teapartypatriots.org/Gro...8c-3eb85f4fe7ec/Connecticut_Libertarian_Party
Exactly. Political party platforms reflect the ideology of the majority in that respective party. I've shown you what the ideology (i.e. party platform) of the Libertarian Party is; they want to get those things done.
As James Dobson so eloquently put it (on Bob Enyart Live in fact): "Ron Paul is unqualified: to lead a Sunday school class, let alone a nation. Ron Paul has long worked with the Libertarian Party, and he spoke at its 2004 National Convention, and yet he has never repudiated that party, even though...
The Libertarian Party is:
Pro-legalized abortion
Pro-legalized euthanasia (killing of sick and handicapped people, etc.)
Pro-legalized homosexuality
Pro-legalized pornography
Pro-legalizing drugs (Crack cocaine, etc.)
Pro-legalizing suicide
Pro-legalizing prostitution
Etc.
The Libertarian Party is an immoral, godless quasi-conservative organization which therefore has no understanding of righteousness in law.
Ron Paul believes abortion is murder, but then he says that he would let the states decide whether to murder children. Thus, he doesn't understand the God-given right to life. He doesn't understand the foundation for law. And thirdly, he doesn't even understand that the U.S. Constitution (for all its flaws) does not allow depriving anyone of life without due process of law, that is, without being convicted of a capital crime. Ron Paul doesn't understand that human rights trump states' rights, and no government should allow any subdivision to own blacks, rape women, or murder Jews, Christians, or children. If Massachusetts legalized the lynching of blacks, the federal government should use every means at its disposal, even to the sending in of the Marines to stop them; so also to protect babies. Ron Paul doesn't understand this, and so is in need of being taught, not in need of being elected. Ron Paul has little understanding of the utmost foundation of civil government, God's enduring command, Do not murder."
http://kgov.com/bel/20071012
(Granted, atheist Ron Paul supporters don't send their kids to Sunday School, so it really doesn't matter to them).
More on Ron Paul and his alleged pro life ideology:
http://prolifeprofiles.com/paul
Ron Paul. He was one of 5 RINOS to vote to repeal DADT.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37254
The man is an embarrassment; he doesn't even think that homosexuality is a sin.
http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=916
Aside from Ron Paul, refer to the Libetarian Party platform (that's how the process works in this country. One person can't get much done at all).
Refer to the Libetarian Party platform (that's how the process works in this country. One person can't get much done at all).
"I remain a LIFETIME MEMBER of the Libertarian Party".
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=547
(Refer to the Libertarian Party platform and their stance on sexual freedom).
"Our constitution was made ONLY for a moral and religious people"
I haven't seen where the Founders stated that the States had rights to go against God's word.
Euthanasia and suicide is part of the LP platform.
The vast majority of crimes are committed by people ON DRUGS, not by those that are trying to get them. Besides, the civil magistrate wasn't ordained by God to be the "pusher man".
If I stick around here long enough, I'll be like the rest of you atheists. Ummmm...no dog comments here.
WizardofOz
New member
So, aSeattleConserv claims that the tea "party" is actually a front for the Libertarian Party.
I'll repeat the section of my post that you neglected to address......
You are only perpetuating a lie by saying implying that Paul is anything less than pro-life. And actually, his plan to outlaw abortion would be much more effective than your federal one if you pro-lifers would just get your heads out of your rear ends.
source
Guess what would happen if his Sanctity of Life Act passed? Just take a guess.
No overturning of a federal ruling necessary. You realize that's a long shot, don't you?
Please address Paul's Sanctity of Life Act. Or, are you too ignorant to put 2+2 together? Take some time, read the bill. Then get back to me.
How's the federal government doing at protecting the unborn?
I'll repeat the section of my post that you neglected to address......
You are only perpetuating a lie by saying implying that Paul is anything less than pro-life. And actually, his plan to outlaw abortion would be much more effective than your federal one if you pro-lifers would just get your heads out of your rear ends.
source
It’s academic to talk about civil liberties if you don’t talk about the true protection of all life. So if you are going to protect liberty, you have to protect the life of the unborn just as well. I have a Bill in congress I certainly would promote and push as president, called the Sanctity of Life Amendment. We establish the principle that life begins at conception. And someone says, ‘oh why are you saying that?’ and I say, ‘well, that’s not a political statement -- that’s a scientific statement that I’m making!“ |
Guess what would happen if his Sanctity of Life Act passed? Just take a guess.
No overturning of a federal ruling necessary. You realize that's a long shot, don't you?
Please address Paul's Sanctity of Life Act. Or, are you too ignorant to put 2+2 together? Take some time, read the bill. Then get back to me.
| SEC. 2. FINDING AND DECLARATION. (a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception. (b) Declaration- Upon the basis of this finding, and in the exercise of the powers of the Congress-- (1) the Congress declares that-- (A) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and (B) the term `person' shall include all human life as defined in subparagraph (A); and (2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State. |
How's the federal government doing at protecting the unborn?
The Graphite
New member
Sarah Palin... pro-life? :rotfl:
Fact - In a live interview on national TV, when asked if she would ever make it illegal to get an abortion, she adamantly stated "absolutely not" and "never." She went on, at some length, explaining how she would not criminalize abortion; this was not taken out of context. The video is available online. This was after she declared that the "morning after" abortion pill should be legal.
Fact - She appointed a Planned Parenthood exec to the state supreme court, despite having other options. She had no problem doing this, as evidenced by her publicly praising this abortionist, saying she would be an great judge. "I have every confidence that Judge Christen has the... wisdom and character to be an outstanding Supreme Court justice."
Fact - After the people of Alaska voted in a landslide to not recognize homosexual civil unions in the state government. Palin then used her executive authority to override the "will of the people" and force the state gov't to recognize civil unions.
Fact - contrary to claims she supports Creationism, she has stated publicly that she doesn't even think both views should be presented in public schools, but rather that only evolution should be taught in public school. She said that evolution "should be taught as an accepted principle" in public school.
Fact - She refuses to support (or even admit to) the personhood of the unborn or any right to life of the unborn. She has never, in her entire career said that abortion should be illegal. While advocating keeping abortion legal, she at least opposes the use of taxpayer funds for "elective" abortions (but is fine with it for other abortions).
Find a meaningful error-in-fact at this profile of Sarah Palin, and win $100 easy cash. Shouldn't take you long... right? But, I warn you, the site has extensive sources documenting the facts on Palin's pro-choice record.
Fact - In a live interview on national TV, when asked if she would ever make it illegal to get an abortion, she adamantly stated "absolutely not" and "never." She went on, at some length, explaining how she would not criminalize abortion; this was not taken out of context. The video is available online. This was after she declared that the "morning after" abortion pill should be legal.
Fact - She appointed a Planned Parenthood exec to the state supreme court, despite having other options. She had no problem doing this, as evidenced by her publicly praising this abortionist, saying she would be an great judge. "I have every confidence that Judge Christen has the... wisdom and character to be an outstanding Supreme Court justice."
Fact - After the people of Alaska voted in a landslide to not recognize homosexual civil unions in the state government. Palin then used her executive authority to override the "will of the people" and force the state gov't to recognize civil unions.
Fact - contrary to claims she supports Creationism, she has stated publicly that she doesn't even think both views should be presented in public schools, but rather that only evolution should be taught in public school. She said that evolution "should be taught as an accepted principle" in public school.
Fact - She refuses to support (or even admit to) the personhood of the unborn or any right to life of the unborn. She has never, in her entire career said that abortion should be illegal. While advocating keeping abortion legal, she at least opposes the use of taxpayer funds for "elective" abortions (but is fine with it for other abortions).
Find a meaningful error-in-fact at this profile of Sarah Palin, and win $100 easy cash. Shouldn't take you long... right? But, I warn you, the site has extensive sources documenting the facts on Palin's pro-choice record.
I only expressed my concerns. As I mentioned before: I'm enjoying watching the Left wee wee in their panties at just the mention of the Tea Party. Eventually conservative ideology will clash with the "if it feels good do it" ideology of Libertarianism (the concern is already being expressed):
http://www.michnews.com/Guest_Commentary/wl032310.shtml
And I'll repeat what James Dobson wrote:
Ron Paul believes abortion is murder, but then he says that he would let the states decide whether to murder children. Thus, he doesn't understand the God-given right to life. He doesn't understand the foundation for law. And thirdly, he doesn't even understand that the U.S. Constitution (for all its flaws) does not allow depriving anyone of life without due process of law, that is, without being convicted of a capital crime. Ron Paul doesn't understand that human rights trump states' rights, and no government should allow any subdivision to own blacks, rape women, or murder Jews, Christians, or children. If Massachusetts legalized the lynching of blacks, the federal government should use every means at its disposal, even to the sending in of the Marines to stop them; so also to protect babies. Ron Paul doesn't understand this, and so is in need of being taught, not in need of being elected. Ron Paul has little understanding of the utmost foundation of civil government, God's enduring command, Do not murder."
Savvy, Kemo Sabe?
WizardofOz
New member
Troubling.
Anyone in particular you enjoy watching go pee?
I think it's a mutual concern for too much government. Apparently you're a new school conservative who likes plenty of government just as long as they can control its grip.
Big brother is your pal.
Thanks, I'll go talk to James then. I'll tell him how off base his assessment is. :wave:
The Graphite
New member
And how are the states doing? Newsflash, Oz ... abortion was legalized FIRST at the STATE level. (Something Ron Paul lies about, as he claims abortion began with Roe v. Wade, when it really began 6 years earlier.) The states led the way in making abortion legal, despite it being explicitly unconstitutional in the federal Constitution.
Ron Paul is pro-choice state-by-state, rather than being pro-choice person-by-person. What's the difference?
http://prolifeprofiles.com/ronpaul
Want an easy $100 cash? Find a meaningful or significant error-in-fact at that profile page of Ron Paul, and the money is yours.
- Status