• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tea Party has their first Congressional Caucus brought to you by Bachmann

Ziggae_6 said:
Well, I think we also have to remember that the Tea Party is not a political party at all or wasn't. So why did they deserve national coverage?
Click to expand...



Right, because when a grass roots movement takes off, that's not news worthy if its not a left wing thing. Rock the vote d00d. :lamo
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Right, because when a grass roots movement takes off, that's not news worthy if its not a left wing thing. Rock the vote d00d. :lamo
Click to expand...

You know I'm not saying no other groups get coverage, but you do have to ask yourself why some groups get coverage and others very little. And Rock the Vote is not trying to become a political party.
 
Ziggae_6 said:
You know I'm not saying no other groups get coverage, but you do have to ask yourself why some groups get coverage and others very little. And Rock the Vote is not trying to become a political party.
Click to expand...




You are right, its a media propaganda machine getting people to vote democratic. :thumbs:



The tea party got coverage because it is news worthy.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is retarded, your point was they were laying claim to the tea party. I was pointing out you couldn't be more hopelessly wrong, they were talking about covering it.


:failpail:


You're gonna need a bigger bucket.
Click to expand...

Simple questions. What would you call a tax day tea party if it was put on by a company called FNC?

If you were going to make a post covering a tea party that someone else put on, you just happened to be there, would you call it REV's tax day tea party?

You realize how stupid it would be of you to call it that if it wasn't being put on by you, right?

I'd quit handing out those fail pails if I were you. You're gonna need a few for yourself ;)
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
You are right, its a media propaganda machine getting people to vote democratic. :thumbs:



The tea party got coverage because it is news worthy.
Click to expand...


Except it got promoted by a national TV host before the event even occurred. At what point did it become news worthy? When Fox set the date?
 
Ziggae_6 said:
Except it got promoted by a national TV host before the event even occurred. At what point did it become news worthy? When Fox set the date?
Click to expand...




Please link to "national TV host" "promoting" the event. thanks.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Personally I'm for a 17% flat tax.... and a balanced budget amendment, But I'll take any.




I think SS should be phased out, those that paid into it are entitled to get what was agreed upon. Military could be trimmed sure and I am a big military guy. Police? Yup. I think some departments have far too many toys but it depends on what they need vs want.... fire depts? again depends, roads? nah, agriculture? not sure what you mean there.


I think the healtcare bill ought to be repealed. funding for finding out people like sex, or other pork barrelled spending. tattoo removal for crack whores, etc... I could go on for days.




Why to me and you... See Gov Christ Christie for an example, compare him to Corzine.




It's a basic philosophy that the left tries to tear apart and ridicule. fact is though you all failed with the vulgar epitaths, you all failed with the racist label, and this to, will be fail. :shrug:
Click to expand...


I don't know what you mean by a basic philosophy to tear apart and ridicule although I suppose you have to say something negative about liberals every few posts. Perhaps you would be lost without that. I am posting for myself and trying to figure out what actions you are proposing behind the slogans. If you asked another "libertarian" you would get similarities and differences in the answers. I am just trying to understand what YOU mean. I post for myself and so do you. Just like when people use slang, the meaning of what they're saying can be blurred.

My opinion is that it would difficult to get agreement on these questions. Sure, you can bring up the obvious "wastes" that look non-essential on the surface, but that's not where the real money is. People are pretty emotional about social security and the military. As a practical point, spending on these areas needs a realistic discussion, but it drives more emotion than even the race question. I'd like the Libertarian Party to talk about this but my guess they wouldn't touch it with a fifty foot pole and I can't blame them.
 
Ziggae_6 said:
I don't know what you mean by a basic philosophy to tear apart and ridicule although I suppose you have to say something negative about liberals every few posts. Perhaps you would be lost without that. I am posting for myself and trying to figure out what actions you are proposing behind the slogans. If you asked another "libertarian" you would get similarities and differences in the answers. I am just trying to understand what YOU mean. I post for myself and so do you. Just like when people use slang, the meaning of what they're saying can be blurred.
Click to expand...


So do you hold democrats to this same rigid standard?


And crying that I say something "negative" about liberals every "few posts" serves what purpose exactly?

Want me to say republicans suck as well? Sure. Any that don't follow the three things I outlined suck. put that in your fairness doctrine and smoke it. :thumbs:

My opinion is that it would difficult to get agreement on these questions. Sure, you can bring up the obvious "wastes" that look non-essential on the surface, but that's not where the real money is. People are pretty emotional about social security and the military. As a practical point, spending on these areas needs a realistic discussion, but it drives more emotion than even the race question. I'd like the Libertarian Party to talk about this but my guess they wouldn't touch it with a fifty foot pole and I can't blame them.
Click to expand...



Actually go to LP.org they do indeed talk about it. :shrug:
 
Ziggae_6 said:
Well, I think we also have to remember that the Tea Party is not a political party at all or wasn't. So why did they deserve national coverage?
Click to expand...

Millions of people gathered around the country to protest together under the banner of lower taxes, less spending and reducing government. That's not newsworthy to you?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So do you hold democrats to this same rigid standard?


And crying that I say something "negative" about liberals every "few posts" serves what purpose exactly?

Want me to say republicans suck as well? Sure. Any that don't follow the three things I outlined suck. put that in your fairness doctrine and smoke it. :thumbs:





Actually go to LP.org they do indeed talk about it. :shrug:
Click to expand...


Answers: Yes, if I don't know what is meant by a slogan, I'll ask about it. I think slogans cause confusion in communications. People say it so many times and think everybody knows what they mean. Sometimes you ask and you realize what you thought was meant didn't mean what you thought at all

Because it doesn't make sense in the context I asked the question. Because I have Democrat and liberal doesn't mean I follow some script when I ask a question. Since I know I asked the question with that attitude, I got to ask why you would answer with something that had nothing what I asked. Its not to embarrass or demean, its to understand what your slogan means. No reason for you to get defensive.

They have a website? Since Social Security and Military spending are the largest areas of the budget, you would expect that to be what they campaign on if they're serious about what they think government should do. Man, would it be unpopular. Instead, in their public campaigning, they talk only about taxes. Everybody hates taxes. But people may claim they don't want socialism, but I really think they would hate Libertarianism. But just my opinion. The more I ask the questions, the less popular I think the Libertarian stance would be with people who truly understand it.
 
Mellie said:
Millions of people gathered around the country to protest together under the banner of lower taxes, less spending and reducing government. That's not newsworthy to you?
Click to expand...

The point is that they got news coverage before that point and I'm not really sure about the numbers. But I can understand the claim of bigger numbers. But don't forget that many of those numbers were other party's plants who were trying to make them look racist. :roll:
 
Mellie said:
Millions of people gathered around the country to protest together under the banner of lower taxes, less spending and reducing government. That's not newsworthy to you?
Click to expand...

And that Obama is a muslim, Hitler, White Pride, and many many many other things.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Simple questions. What would you call a tax day tea party if it was put on by a company called FNC?
Click to expand...

I'd call it.... wait for it.... "non-existent"




If you were going to make a post covering a tea party that someone else put on, you just happened to be there, would you call it REV's tax day tea party?

You realize how stupid it would be of you to call it that if it wasn't being put on by you, right?

I'd quit handing out those fail pails if I were you. You're gonna need a few for yourself ;)
Click to expand...



Depends I guess on how much screen real-estate I had. :shrug:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I'd call it.... wait for it.... "non-existent"








Depends I guess on how much screen real-estate I had. :shrug:
Click to expand...
You're ability to ignore the facts are astounding ;)

Putting your name on something means something. It's laying claim to it.

You can argue that they didn't put on those tea parties and that it was silly to put their companies name in front of it, but you can't argue that they didn't make the claim or that putting your name on something isn't laying claim to it.
 
roughdraft274 said:
You're ability to ignore the facts are astounding ;)

Putting your name on something means something. It's laying claim to it.

You can argue that they didn't put on those tea parties and that it was silly to put their companies name in front of it, but you can't argue that they didn't make the claim or that putting your name on something isn't laying claim to it.
Click to expand...



unless you have the video that shows the banner in context, it's dishonest to assume that one picture of an instant banner splash was fox news purposefully laying claim to the tea party.

It's a super weak argument.
 
roughdraft274 said:
fox-20090408-opposition2.jpg


Of course, putting your companies name in front of it doesn't mean you're laying claim to it or anything crazy like that, lol. Just being fair and balanced.
Click to expand...

Somebody had to cover the news. The other networks were ignoring it, then eventually, when that didn't work, they belittled it. Was that fair?
 
Ziggae_6 said:
Well, I think we also have to remember that the Tea Party is not a political party at all or wasn't. So why did they deserve national coverage?
Click to expand...

It's called news. They do have a few more members than Code Pink.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
unless you have the video that shows the banner in context, it's dishonest to assume that one picture of an instant banner splash was fox news purposefully laying claim to the tea party.

It's a super weak argument.
Click to expand...
That would be dishonest... unless the banner said "FNC tax day tea parties".

That was beautiful pivot right there rev. Did you play quarter back in highschool?

I understand that conservatives can't criticize fox news, but in this one instance you can't really make the argument that Fox wasn't toeing that line at the very least of covering the tea parties and sponsoring the tea parties. They ran that banner for a week straight on various shows, had numerous hosts, opinion and otherwise, ask for people to come out and join the tea parties, where you could go to find the closest one to you, held a virtual tea party on their website for those who couldn't drive out to an actual tea party, hosted various tea party officials like Mark Williams of tea party express numerous times to advertise their movement etc.

The very least you could argue is that they were cheerleading this movement, not covering, but cheerleading. At the most, which I find much more likely, they were actually behind the scenes organizing at least in part some of these parties.
 
Barbbtx said:
Somebody had to cover the news. The other networks were ignoring it, then eventually, when that didn't work, they belittled it. Was that fair?
Click to expand...

Just like fox news belittled anti-war protests?

I'm not arguing that all media is fair, but I'm sure if you're honest about it you understand that other media outlets being liberally biased doesn't automatically make a conservative slant unbiased, right?

Some places gave them some coverage. Not nearly as much as fox, because quite frankly they didn't deserve that much. No movement has ever had that much advertising and coverage and support from the media as the tea parties had.

BTW, I don't care that fox isn't balanced or that they cheerleaded for the tea parties, I say let them do whatever the hell they want, but to act like they impartially covered these events just doesn't match up with what really happened.
 
roughdraft274 said:
That would be dishonest... unless the banner said "FNC tax day tea parties".

That was beautiful pivot right there rev. Did you play quarter back in highschool?
Click to expand...



yup-real-gentleman-24548-1247173302-26.jpg




Context. you need some.



I understand that conservatives can't criticize fox news, but in this one instance you can't really make the argument that Fox wasn't toeing that line at the very least of covering the tea parties and sponsoring the tea parties. They ran that banner for a week straight on various shows, had numerous hosts, opinion and otherwise, ask for people to come out and join the tea parties, where you could go to find the closest one to you, held a virtual tea party on their website for those who couldn't drive out to an actual tea party, hosted various tea party officials like Mark Williams of tea party express numerous times to advertise their movement etc.
Click to expand...


FOX like all cable and tv news sucks. now that we have your strawman out of the way there are several issues with your points.

1. links? non biased ones please.

2. quotes? from non biased sources please...


The very least you could argue is that they were cheerleading this movement, not covering, but cheerleading. At the most, which I find much more likely, they were actually behind the scenes organizing at least in part some of these parties.
Click to expand...



I thought they covered it more favorably than MSNBC, but that's hardly something to cry over. suggesting as you did that they held thier own tea party's is dishonest.



:failpail:

I told you you would need a bigger bucket.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
yup-real-gentleman-24548-1247173302-26.jpg




Context. you need some.






FOX like all cable and tv news sucks. now that we have your strawman out of the way there are several issues with your points.

1. links? non biased ones please.

2. quotes? from non biased sources please...






I thought they covered it more favorably than MSNBC, but that's hardly something to cry over. suggesting as you did that they held thier own tea party's is dishonest.



:failpail:

I told you you would need a bigger bucket.
Click to expand...

Tell me exactly what you think I'm making up.
They ran that banner for a week straight on various shows, had numerous hosts, opinion and otherwise, ask for people to come out and join the tea parties, where you could go to find the closest one to you, held a virtual tea party on their website for those who couldn't drive out to an actual tea party, hosted various tea party officials like Mark Williams of tea party express numerous times to advertise their movement etc.
Click to expand...
Which part of those claims do you not believe? I'm not going to spend all day finding links for stuff that is readily available to anyone with google for you because in the past when I do go to the trouble to bring you links you ignore them and act as if some quip is an actual response.

What point to take offense to? The virtual tea party that they held online? That they hosted tea party officials numerous times? Told people where to go to find the closest tea party?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom