DONEPhatscotty wrote: If you need to label me one way or another, just mark me down with whatever you think Ron Paul is

Moderator: Community Team
DONEPhatscotty wrote: If you need to label me one way or another, just mark me down with whatever you think Ron Paul is

best and only hope for what though? And about privacy, then I would wonder why you even brought your mom into this...Juan_Bottom wrote:Mostly for privacy.
I'm paying her mortgage and my sister is in college. We're all that's left. My mom is out of work, partially because she's sick. Partially because she lives in an area known as a black hole of job growth. And the mortgage costs me half my monthly earnings, so I can't participate in life a whole lot.
Obamacare is probably her best and only hope.
I need a revolution. =(
Phatscotty wrote: And about privacy, then I would wonder why you even brought your mom into this...

I don't think there's a single individual in these fora that honestly believes you're an Independent. Some may say so because they want to back up one of their own, but I really don't believe they honestly think that. I know I certainly don't. Hell, I can't think of anything you've said in these fora that wasn't Conservobot in nature. It's like me trying to convince the fora that I'm a Catholic. In fact, I would suggest to you that I've made more statements in these fora that are in favor of Christianity than you have made that are in favor of liberal policies and I don't think anyone's mistaking me for a religious individual.Phatscotty wrote:That is easier to swallow if you could accept that I am an Independent.Juan_Bottom wrote:That's PS gift. He's for the Conservatives, but somehow is against them. . . and I never know what card he's going to play. Sometimes I don't even think the card is from the right deck. We're playing Polish Poker and he passes me the old maid. He's unpredictable, mostly. But for the Conservatives.
Chariot of Fire wrote:As for GreecePwns.....yeah, what? A massive debt. Get a job you slacker.
Viceroy wrote:[The Biblical creation story] was written in a time when there was no way to confirm this fact and is in fact a statement of the facts.
And apparently, being paid to speak by the Tea Party.GreecePwns wrote:An independent who is also actively involved in the GOP primary delegation of Minnesota?
comic boy wrote:I assume he means independent of integrity or truth, that adds up.

the RON PAUL controlled GOP delegation of MinnesotaGreecePwns wrote:An independent who is also actively involved in the GOP primary delegation of Minnesota?
The Tea Party is closer to the center than it is the right. For every 10 tea party members, 4 are Republican, 5 are independent or Libertarian, and 1 is a Democrat. But, even after all these years Woodruff, and all your talk about the Tea Party, you still don't accept it for what it is, and have not begun to try to understand either, a lot like trolling.Woodruff wrote:And apparently, being paid to speak by the Tea Party.GreecePwns wrote:An independent who is also actively involved in the GOP primary delegation of Minnesota?
so i take it you're voting for romney?Juan_Bottom wrote:
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
It's time for Juan Bottom to learn the difference between a state program and a federal programJuan_Bottom wrote:
Why would you want to vote for somebody who's running against his biggest legislative success?john9blue wrote:so i take it you're voting for romney?Juan_Bottom wrote:
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
state programs and national programs are 2 different things. and I don't want to vote for Romney. Romney is not running against romneycare, from what I have seen he is embracing and defending it.spurgistan wrote:Why would you want to vote for somebody who's running against his biggest legislative success?john9blue wrote:so i take it you're voting for romney?Juan_Bottom wrote:
I recognize the Tea Party for what it is. I was a part of the Tea Party when it started out. Then it became absorbed into the right-wing machine, and I lost interest in being a part of it. I still believe the Tea Party could have been a great thing for this nation, but I would suggest to you that trying to play like the Tea Party ISN'T now a part of the right-wing is disengenuous at best, and more likely downright dishonest.Phatscotty wrote:The Tea Party is closer to the center than it is the right. For every 10 tea party members, 4 are Republican, 5 are independent or Libertarian, and 1 is a Democrat. But, even after all these years Woodruff, and all your talk about the Tea Party, you still don't accept it for what it is, and have not begun to try to understand either, a lot like trolling.Woodruff wrote:And apparently, being paid to speak by the Tea Party.GreecePwns wrote:An independent who is also actively involved in the GOP primary delegation of Minnesota?
It's not saving any revenue right now anyway, so your argument is disingenuous.Juan_Bottom wrote:Hilariously, that notorious flip-flopper Romney has said that he wants to repeal the parts of Obamacare that pay for Obamacare. He'd change it from a revenue-saving program into a deficit program.
Pay attention people. This isn't new and everyone made fun of him for this.
Why wouldn't the Tea Party be right-wing? The left-wing wants to perpetually grow the federal government into an unsustainable monstrosity. Heck, we can't even sustain our current spending. It's only conservatives and libertarians who are even trying to reign in the spending. The Tea Party is a crucial part of achieving that goal.Woodruff wrote:I recognize the Tea Party for what it is. I was a part of the Tea Party when it started out. Then it became absorbed into the right-wing machine, and I lost interest in being a part of it. I still believe the Tea Party could have been a great thing for this nation, but I would suggest to you that trying to play like the Tea Party ISN'T now a part of the right-wing is disengenuous at best, and more likely downright dishonest.
I didn't say that it would save money today. But everyone except the Republican nutters acknowledge that it will save a shit-ton of money for our nation. So your argument is disingenuous. There's no debate about this here.Night Strike wrote:It's not saving any revenue right now anyway, so your argument is disingenuous.
There is absolutely no reason for the basic Tea Party ideals to be left-wing or right-wing. None. Zero. Zilch.Night Strike wrote:It's not saving any revenue right now anyway, so your argument is disingenuous.Juan_Bottom wrote:Hilariously, that notorious flip-flopper Romney has said that he wants to repeal the parts of Obamacare that pay for Obamacare. He'd change it from a revenue-saving program into a deficit program.
Pay attention people. This isn't new and everyone made fun of him for this.
Why wouldn't the Tea Party be right-wing?Woodruff wrote:I recognize the Tea Party for what it is. I was a part of the Tea Party when it started out. Then it became absorbed into the right-wing machine, and I lost interest in being a part of it. I still believe the Tea Party could have been a great thing for this nation, but I would suggest to you that trying to play like the Tea Party ISN'T now a part of the right-wing is disengenuous at best, and more likely downright dishonest.
That really isn't true, necessarily. Do you get all of your information from propoganda?Woodruff wrote:The left-wing wants to perpetually grow the federal government into an unsustainable monstrosity.
The Tea Party has become a mockery of what it started out as.Woodruff wrote:Heck, we can't even sustain our current spending. It's only conservatives and libertarians who are even trying to reign in the spending. The Tea Party is a crucial part of achieving that goal.
There's no debate about it because the claims aren't true, so people don't waste their time discussing it. This law increases federal spending on health care and does nothing to improve the system to make private insurance costs go down. The only way they even claimed that the law decreased federal spending on health care is because it forced states to pay for the Medicaid expansions, but then the Supreme Court threw out those portions.Juan_Bottom wrote:I didn't say that it would save money today. But everyone except the Republican nutters acknowledge that it will save a shit-ton of money for our nation. So your argument is disingenuous. There's no debate about this here.Night Strike wrote:It's not saving any revenue right now anyway, so your argument is disingenuous.
It's not propaganda when it's true. Just look at what the government is actually doing. Progressives want to expand the government in every avenue possible, no matter what the costs are. If they aren't making enough money to pay for it, they demand that "the rich" give even more money to the government to pay for it. They don't question whether a program is good or beneficial (muchless even trying to figure out if it's Constitutional) while going to enact it anyway.Woodruff wrote:That really isn't true, necessarily. Do you get all of your information from propoganda?Night Strike wrote:The left-wing wants to perpetually grow the federal government into an unsustainable monstrosity.
You were part of the Tea Party.....until you bought the media bullshit about it.Woodruff wrote:I recognize the Tea Party for what it is. I was a part of the Tea Party when it started out. Then it became absorbed into the right-wing machine, and I lost interest in being a part of it. I still believe the Tea Party could have been a great thing for this nation, but I would suggest to you that trying to play like the Tea Party ISN'T now a part of the right-wing is disengenuous at best, and more likely downright dishonest.Phatscotty wrote:The Tea Party is closer to the center than it is the right. For every 10 tea party members, 4 are Republican, 5 are independent or Libertarian, and 1 is a Democrat. But, even after all these years Woodruff, and all your talk about the Tea Party, you still don't accept it for what it is, and have not begun to try to understand either, a lot like trolling.Woodruff wrote:And apparently, being paid to speak by the Tea Party.GreecePwns wrote:An independent who is also actively involved in the GOP primary delegation of Minnesota?