Hey, there! Log in / Register
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
What connection to "tea partiers"?
Adam, where did you get tea partiers out of that article?
Tea Partiers are shills for
Tea Partiers are shills for the MIC. They complain about the relative pittances the federal government spends on social spending and ignore, completely, the Federal government's out of control military spending. The "Tea Party" is an MIC/Corporate/FedGov front group.
The "Tea Party" was complaining about ACORN and their 53 million in fed gov funds over 15 years (a totally Fox News created "scandal") while this country was being ripped off by our financial elite criminals.
They are useless easily misdirected boobs for the most part. I had hopes for the Tea Party types but they are ineffectual sellouts and a complete waste of time as far as change goes.
BTW- the scary Mulsims are about as much as a concern to me as trolls under the Tobin bridge- ie- not at all.
How many tea partiers do you know?
My guess is none. You don't know what you're talking about. The national organizations (like the Tea Party Express) are indeed shills for the establishment (including the MIC), but the local groups (which came first, and are the driving force behind the movement) are nothing of the sort; and in fact, the focus of their protests vary widely from group to group. They are not boobs, and are not being controlled.
You shouldn't waste 1's and 0's on ignorant rants.
No true Scotsman!
At best, your point is that local activists are being co-opted by national actors with differing agendas. So, why not be upset about THAT than someone observing it?
Or do you just like conveniently refusing association on a whim? No true scotsman would ever be a shill for the establishment so they aren't true scotsmen!
Quite simple....
...anybody that isn't a die-hard liberal is a tea partier. That's a UHub tradition. ;-)
Funny, I know quite a few
Funny, I know quite a few [real] conservatives that are not, and despise the group of boobs.
Then again, they've been named RINO's or "Liberals" for having a brain, and using it.
It wasn't in the article
It was from knowing that a) Treasurer Tim like the tea partiers (he showed up at the Boston stop of the Sarah Palin Tour and b) Tea partiers don't like Muslims. Combine that with Cahill accusing Patrick of "pandering" by meeting with Muslims.
Treasurer Tim
"likes the tea partiers."
Although if Treasurer Tim himself were asked to find the typo, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be able to. Only a total moron would be killing himself like Treasurer Tim has been lately...
Cahill Consultant: "That quote you gave about Jack O'Brien and the Probation Dept. isn't really going over very well. You made it sound like we all just have to accept corruption as the price of a representative form of government."
Cahill: "Hmmmm... Really? Did I say that? Well, let's say something else, to draw attention away from that stupid thing I just said. How about 'All Muslims are TERRORISTS!!' That oughta fly, right?"
Cahill Consultant: (making mental note to update resume) "Sure, boss."
Having attended several tea party meetings and protests...
I have never heard the subject of Muslims raised once. Sorry, Adam - you're wrong.
C'mon
It's called inference. If you don't know what that means, perhaps this will help: http://www.justfuckinggoogleit.com/
Cahill unites Muslims, Jews and Christians
Leaders from the three religions to condemn Cahill.
A sure sign of desperation
Cahill pandering to bigotry is not going to save his candidacy. Pretty shameful stuff: equating every Muslim in the Commonwealth with terrorism is like saying Catholics favor child abuse.
Not every Teabagger is a racist, but the racists the Tea Party clearly attracts are kind of hard to miss. And I can't shake the feeling that a lot of them are just disaffected GOP voters who can't accept the fact that the POTUS is a black guy. Still dupes of the right, just wearing a different hat. Most are completely incoherent on the issues: "Stop socialized medicine, and keep your hands off my Medicare!"
It is a sign of desperation...
Cahill and Baker are simply flat out horrible politicians. I kind of respect when someone doesn't align themselves with either party, but I think Cahill just didn't have the stones to run as a D or R and simply pulled a Nader and found an easy way to slip into the election.
What?!!! How dare you!
They're not GOP, they're "libertarians." Here's the modern definition:
noun - A person, usually of European lineage, who has theirs, so f*** you.
I hope that clarifies things.
don't steal my bumper
don't steal my bumper sticker!
:D
well if they are truly
well if they are truly libertarians then they are half-lib themselves, right? Pro-choice, anti-war, pro-legalization (pot, heroin, you name it), pro-gay marriage.... i'll take a fiscal conservative/social liberal any day of the week over a tea partier (who can't understand the paradox of platform of strong military, low taxes and balanced budget)
Actually, wouldn't the true libertarian.....
be against any form of marriage?
Serious Answer To Non-Serious(?) Question
Libertarians are neither for nor against marriage, per se.
Insofar as religious ceremonies are concerned, that's entirely the business of those who are of that religion.
In the secular sense, we view it as just another contractual agreement. What we are NOT in favor of, concerning marriage, is when the state feels a need to either sanctify the religious ceremony or the contractual agreement, and charge a fee for doing so, or when the state feels they have a right to deny any two people the right to enter into a religious ceremony or contractual agreement that the two have decided to pursue.
Oh, and to the semi-anonymous person with the faulty dictionary: Fuck you, you ignorant prick. I'll match my charitable contributions, by percentage of income, with anyone's, including yours, any day of the week. Just because I prefer that my money not be taxed from my hands does not mean that it never leaves my hands, dickhead. Jesus help me, I am so fucking sick of people who don't have the intelligence to understand that not wanting to give the government more power does not automatically equate to selfishness.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Suldog what about abortion?
Would some libertarians feel that that the fetus/baby has a right to live?
Absolutely
And some would think that's an odd way of phrasing the question :-)
I can honestly tell you that this is one issue where Libertarians disagree with each other vehemently. Some are Pro-Choice, some are Pro-Life. If I had to give you a number, I'd say about 75 - 25 Pro-Choice, but that is strictly my guess from random observation at convention, state board meetings, candidate receptions, and other official gatherings.
Here's what the official Platform says on the issue:
1.4 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
(and, if anyone would like to explore other issues for themselves, the platform may be found at http://www.lp.org/platform )
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Yes, the official position is
Yes, the official position is very explicitly Pro-Choice.
I wouldn't think Libertarians
would have official positions on anything!
Hey, they're nothing if not
Hey, they're nothing if not hypocritical.
Edit: That was a joke. Come on people, laugh at yourselves.
Our Concern
Our concern is with official government positions. We're quite happy with ourselves :-)
Oh, and Mike, try this one on for size (it was all the rage one year at the state convention...)
Q: How many Libertarians does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None. The free market will take care of it.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Cahill hopes to jump on the tea party bandwagon
that swept Scott Brown into office. He was all over WTKK yesterday. Nothing funnier than listening to him discuss race issues with famous racist Jimmy Severino. Then on to Michele (on Facebook with one L!) McPhee, the Leo Gorcey of Boston talk radio to whip up all those civil servants from Malden into a towel head hatin' frenzy!
Actually, I think his campaign was over...
...when his reaction to the Probation scandal was the political equivalent of, "Hey, whaddya gonna do, it happens." Talk about floundering...fire your adviser, Cahill. Can't wait to hear his reaction to the DADT repeal or how the state Senate approved getting rid of the hack holidays. On second thought...never mind.
"Playing Politics"
Forgive me, but didn't Cahill completely misuse the phrase "playing politics with terrorism"? My understanding is that it means using voters' fears of terrorism to advance a political agenda -- which, it seems, is exactly what Cahill is doing, and the exact opposite of what Patrick did.
Cahill is politically gut-shot
The radio ads (Baker: Who, me? I had nothing to do with that....) really set up
him up. But the coup de grace (I know, I'm mixing my metaphors) was his clueless
comments about patronage in the DOC.
He should have joined that other two nitwits in their Claude Rains imitation:
"I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find patronage going on here!"
Christ, this is what we get to choose from in November? Ugh.