Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Of course not, but in small numbers and given the checks and balances that we have, they don't really scare me either, and I would trade them rooting out the entrenched assholes that we currently have up there.

Oh, and I think Boxer is about as bad as you get in the Senate, and I'm praying she gets beat by Carly.

So, you'd trade the current entrenched assholes for soon-to-be entrenched assholes who also happen to be Penske-certifiable idiots in one way or another?

Because that's what you'd get with, for example, Joe Miller.

I can maybe see it with Buck or Angle, as either would stand a good chance of losing in 6 years.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I think this is a misread as well. Certainly the GOP is trying to bring them into the tent, but I don't think the average Tea Bagger readily identifies with either political party.

The average Tea Partier is a conservative who consistently votes Republican but who may have issues with the party insiders. Nonetheless, if you think it's a new political movement, you're fooling yourself. It's a bunch of conservatives with conservative ideas, often funded by conservative interests, who are going to vote for conservatives. It is what the conservative movement has become.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I'm supportive of the movement because I like to see the establishment shaken up. When I vote next week, I will be voting out every incumbent on the ballot, regardless of party.

How often do you vote for Democrats?

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

So, you'd trade the current entrenched assholes for soon-to-be entrenched assholes who also happen to be Penske-certifiable idiots in one way or another?

Because that's what you'd get with, for example, Joe Miller.

I can maybe see it with Buck or Angle, as either would stand a good chance of losing in 6 years.

No, I wouldn't vote for them, but I'd be willing to go with that trade.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The average Tea Partier is a conservative who consistently votes Republican but who may have issues with the party insiders. Nonetheless, if you think it's a new political movement, you're fooling yourself. It's a bunch of conservatives with conservative ideas, often funded by conservative interests, who are going to vote for conservatives. It is what the conservative movement has become.

Yea, don't think so. But this is what the conventional wisdom is saying and I'm not going to try to talk you out of it.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

How often do you vote for Democrats?

I voted for WJC in 1992. I also voted for DEMs when I lived in SF from 1999-2005, but there really isn't another choice up there - you can choose between DEMs and totally fucked up crazy beyond belief.

[Gattigap]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I'm not sure what you want me to do with this link,

Well, when you put it that way, a couple of ideas come to mind.

but I certainly don't need WaPo to tell me what is plain as day.

If the goals and aims of the Tea Party are that clear to you, then I agree there's not much use in your reading this article.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

Penske-certifiable idiots

First, I think you need an "(R)" after Penske-certifiable idiots. He is very keen on enforcing his IP rights.

Then, I believe Penske has actually certified some of these as idiots, so they are not just "Penske Certifiable (R) idiots" but "Penske Certified (R) Idiots". Penske, please correct me if I am wrong there.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Certainly the GOP is trying to bring them into the tent,

You know Dick Armey have been involved from the start, right?

When I vote next week, I will be voting out every incumbent on the ballot, regardless of party.

Well, that just sums up genius right there.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I see the voting out of incumbants and nominating candidates that are not backed by the machine as a huge step forward.

Strangely, this is hopelessly naive.

Originally Posted by sgtclub

A huge portion of the electorate is simply tired of the culture wars, your team my team environment, and greedy, moronic politicians that have served the public horribly for the last 15 years. They are at our wits end, and if that means electing a few morons to make a point, so be it.

Ah, transcendance through idiocy. Let's get beyond greedy, moronic partisan politics that don't serve the public by electing people who are not just venal, cynical and greedy but even dumber than the ones already there - what could possibly go wrong?

I don't know whose wits' end you're talking about, but it seems like it was a pretty damn short trip.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

Well, when you put it that way, a couple of ideas come to mind.



If the goals and aims of the Tea Party are that clear to you, then I agree there's not much use in your reading this article.

My point was that the mainstream media has been behind the curve on this since day one, so I don't really looked to them to have their finger on the pulse.

There is certainly a lot wrong with the movement. However, for the last year, the left and MSM have attempted to demonize it (e.g., they are all racist, which is a common tactic on the left*), so forgive me if I don't put much stock into your link.


*The left uses one of three tactics - the opposition is either (1) mean, (2) stupid, or (3) racist. The right has its own tactics.

Originally Posted by sgtclub

My point was that the mainstream media

Who is "the mainstream media"?

Edited to add:

The left uses one of three tactics - the opposition is either (1) mean, (2) stupid, or (3) racist.

I know! It's so unfair. Especially when the Tea Party has proven itself again and again to be a movement founded on principles of tolerance, academic rigor and abhorrence of racism in every form.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Adder

You know Dick Armey have been involved from the start, right?



Well, that just sums up genius right there.

Originally Posted by Adder

Strangely, this is hopelessly naive.

It sort of depends on what particular district he's voting in. There are more than a couple of districts in Illinois where a straight anti-incumbent ticket (from local, thru county and every state office) would lead to an over-all improvement of the governing process. And that would include if a LaRouchie were the only non-incumbent choice.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by ironweed

Who is "the mainstream media"?

Anyone complainer-X disagrees with more than 50% of the time.