The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party· Page 4

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

+1 to NSD even though he went off topic. I think people who go around saying "it can't happen here" need to be slapped upside their heads.

Wade - I'm kind of the same way. There's some things in every party I agree with but for the most part, don't want to be a part of anyone.

You probably have more Libertarian ideals than I do. I think they make sense on paper, but when it comes to energy, we do need some changes so that's where I break off from that party as well. Plus, I call myself an environmentalist which Libertarians aren't too fond of.

I think using solar/wind is ideally better than oil/coal. But then there's that "ideally." If we can make oil/coal more efficient and less polluting, would be nice as we got a long way to go with solar/wind still.

We do agree that #1 and #5 are favorites but I'd also add #10. I pay way too much in taxes. Pisses me off.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#32

I am not interested in joining a political party called The Tea Party.

"Wade" wrote:

Particularly when it's nothing more than the Republican Party that has changed from a sweaty wifebeater to a clean(er) t-shirt.

I agree with almost everything you say in this post, but you express your thoughts better than I can.

The Tea Party ideals as laid down by zombieslayer are basically a more strident form of Republicanism, not anything resembling true constitutionalism. A Tea Party administration wouldn't produce any substantive change in the political landscape, at least none that I'd be comfortable with. We'd probably see the passage of such monstrosities as federal Defense of Marriage Acts.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#33

You probably have more Libertarian ideals than I do. I think they make sense on paper, but when it comes to energy, we do need some changes so that's where I break off from that party as well. Plus, I call myself an environmentalist which Libertarians aren't too fond of.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

I think it's important to distinguish between libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. They are not necessarily the same thing. I know quite a few people, including myself, who are political and philosophical libertarians but have no intention of ever joining the Libertarian Party. Though I consider myself a passionate libertarian, there are a number of planks in the Libertarian Platform with which I disagree. Moreover, I think the Libertarian Party is run by a bunch of strident, loudmouthed kooks who do more harm than good for the libertarian movement. (I mean, Bob Barr for President . . . seriously, people?)

I do not believe there is any inherent conflict between libertarianism and environmentalism. In fact, most libertarians I know, including myself, would consider themselves environmentalists. Where we would tend to differ from liberals is in the solutions we would propose to environmental problems. Most of us would likely favor private stewardship (with, perhaps, standards of accountability) to direct governmental control.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#34

Yeah, thus I call myself libertarian but with a small L instead of Libertarian (meaning belonging to the party). Plus, I think for myself. Agreed about the environmentalism.

Most Libertarians I've met have the social skills of a software engineer and will put you to sleep faster than a geology professor. Last wine party I went to, I had the misfortune of talking to someone from the local Libertarian party. Let's just say I had more fun at a dentist office.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#35

Heh, I've often wondered aloud why the average self-described libertarian is a skinny, dorky white male who has the social skills of a chimpanzee and hasn't been laid since the Bicentennial (if ever), and why there are so few attractive females in the libertarian movement.

I am fortunate enough to know one, and she's a model. 🙂

Cheesey
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#36

I always laugh when i hear that democrats want a "distribution of wealth".
I can understand why rich people don't like what the dems are trying to do. Kind of a "Robin Hood" approach. They always make it sound like rich people are "E-VIL!!!"
If it wasn't for rich people, there would be no companies for the rest of us to work for. Most of the rich people worked hard to earn what they have. What right does the government have to grab into their pockets? Just because they have more money then the average person?
It's NOT fair or right to punish the rich because they have more, is it?
I mean, they should pay their fair share, but ONLY their fair share.

And believe me, i'm NOT a rich guy. I have to sweat week to week to pay bills.

MassPackersFan
Member

14 years ago

#37

Do you mean a "redistribution" of wealth? How do you NOT have a distribution of wealth?

Wealth is redistributed under both Republican and Democratic governments. It's merely a matter of how much and through what mechanisms.

I'm sure your intent was to compare the Democratic party to COMMUNISTS. Cue sinister music.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#38

A few months ago I created a thread quoting an article in which Tea Partiers scoffed at the notion of eliminating Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security. So not even the supposedly most conservative wing of the Republican Party has a plan to eliminate these entitlement programs. That means Republicans and Democrats alike favor the redistribution of wealth.

Republicans don't want less government; if anything, given their constant yammering for greater defense spending, they want more government. The federal budget went from $1 trillion under Clinton to $3 trillion under Bush, an increase that outpaced inflation by several orders of magnitude.

Republicans don't favor small government. They simply want control of what government exists. Just as Democrats do.

Formo
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#39

Republicans don't want less government; if anything, given their constant yammering for greater defense spending, they want more government. The federal budget went from $1 trillion under Clinton to $3 trillion under Bush, an increase that outpaced inflation by several orders of magnitude.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Here's an honest question.. Do you think that Bush's 'War on Terror' and 911 had anything to do with the federal budget increase while he was the Commander in-Chief? If so, how much of it can be blamed on that?

Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!

Rockmolder
Honored Member

14 years ago

#40

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Why do you hate freedom?

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (10h) : QB coach Sean Mannion

Zero2Cool (10h) : DL Coach DeMarcus Covington

dfosterf (13h) : from ft Belvoir, Quantico and points south. Somber reminder of this tragedy at Reagan Nat Airport

dfosterf (13h) : So eerily quiet here in Alexandria. I live in the flight path of commercial craft coming from the south and west, plus the military craft

dfosterf (13h) : So eeri

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Now that's a thought, maybe they're looking at the college ranks? Maybe not head coaches but DC/assistant DCs with league experience?

beast (18h) : College Coaches wouldn't want that publicly, as it would hurt recruiting and they might not get the job.

beast (18h) : I thought they were supposed to publicly announce them, at least the NFL ones. Hafley was from college, so I believe different rules.

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Who knows who they're interviewing? I mean, nobody knew about Hafley and then out of nowhere he was hired

beast (21h) : I wonder what's taking so long with hiring a DL coach, 2 of the 3 known to interview have already been hired elsewhere.

Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Packers coach Matt LaFleur hires Luke Getsy as senior assistant, extends Rich Bisaccia's deal

Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.

Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh

dfosterf (27-Jan) : Happy Birthday Dave!

Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : happy birthday dhazer

TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later

buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!

buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.

buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.

packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : well, he was

TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Eagles down by contact on the fumble....fuck you NFL

Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : I think this games over

beast (26-Jan) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs

Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : This game looks too big for Washington

packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns

packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts

packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,

beast (26-Jan) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)

beast (26-Jan) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab

Zero2Cool (25-Jan) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?

Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me

Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not

Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!

beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22