TEA Party Poll: You'll never guess what groups of people they have issues with

That's a pretty big leap going from this:

to this:

 

Yes those gays and lesbians with all the power. They almost have enough power to have equal rights, but they don't have equal rights so their power is tenuously kept in check.

The part about their support of the AZ immigration law adds so much fuel to their hypocrisy. As long as the state govt. is intrusive, and abuses authority they support it, but it shouldn't be the federal govt. doing it. Is that really the stance?

Sorry thumbs, but it appears more and more like your tea party movement is a fraud. I feel bad for those taken in by the fraud.

 

Hmmm, so according to this poll, the majority of voters support the Arizona law.

 

On a quick review of the article, it seems to be quite a leap to go from support for Arizona law to "unease about minorities" in general. Even though I am against the law, I can see how a person can support it without being afraid of/hate/nervous about all people of color. I wonder if there were questions in the survey about thing like "whether black people/Asians/Latino have too much power, etc." "are your favorite Rockets Dan Langhi, Spanoulis and Budinger" or even questions more direcctly relevant to racial bias.

 

wow that truly is a garbage article written by the far left liberal. I admit there are crap articles from both sides and here is evidence of one from the left.
I don't support everything the tea party stands for. Well I am not sure what the Tea Party stands for and neither do a lot of the members since there is no documented core values. But I do support their core beliefs of smaller government, personal responsibility, and less taxes. By the way I am a minority and not a racist.

 

This post perfectly sums up everything you have ever written here. Funny, in a sadly oblivious sort of way.

 

rhad, YOU are the far left liberal!

 

Excellent. And yes, it is pretty sad.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to rhadamanthus again."

 

mwahahahahahahaha

 

rhadman i was simply acknowledging the fact the the tea party has no central figure or leader. I noticed that when I wrote the post but I believe the Tea Party or those who choose to get involved in the Tea Party in one way or another have a shared belief of conservative fiscal responsibility.

 

on another note it really is hard to distinguish what a party stands for anymore. What does the Democratic party stand for? What does the Republican party stand for? There is a set of core values that draws people together behind a certain party. Just because the Tea Party doesn't have a central leader with a documented belief it doesn't mean there wasn't some core value there that got the movement started in the first place.

 

Textbook. When exposed, alter the story. You are perfectly predictable.

 

How am I altering my story? I am only clarifying what you misinterpreted. Don't be so blinded just because I may have different beliefs than you

 

They have a shared belief - but it's not conservative fiscal responsibility. For the most part, they are opposed to higher taxes, opposed to cutting defense spending, and opposed to cuts in medicare and social security. Those three equal the very opposite of fiscal responsibility.

Their shared value is anger. Some are angry at the banks or the bailouts. Some are angry at government. Some are angry we have a black President. But they are all just angry and just want to throw everyone overboard, with no rhyme or reason. And rarely do any of them actually have any sort of functional governing philosophy or solutions for any of their anger.

 

Not if you're paying attention.

Health care reform. Financial reform. Immigration reform. Energy reform with a focus on alternative energy.

Opposing the Democrats no matter what. Even if Dems adopt GOP ideas, as they did with health care reform.

True - if you consider hatred and anger to be core values.

 

everything you claim above is untrue and unfounded and just more blind liberal bias and talking points

 

Clarification: to make (an idea, statement, etc.) clear or intelligible; to free from ambiguity.

Alteration: a change; modification or adjustment.

The original statement:

Clarified:

Altered:

There is nothing wrong with admitting error and altering your position, you just never admit to it. As I stated in the referenced post above:

Oh, and that was a well-placed "woe is me, I'm being unfairly criticized" pity-party for your last sentence. Duly noted.

 

Tell me, sunsfan, can you prove this assertion? Can you document any of your claims as Major can very easily document his? Or is this a new step in the sunsfan methodology?

SUNSFAN GUIDE TO D&D DEBATE:
1) Make a volatile and heavily biased statement/accusation.
2) When exposed, change position to something vaguely moderate, while still repeating original biased mantra.
3) When further exposed, play the victim and/or get upset.
4) If countered with frank observations, resort to step 1) ??
.
.
Profit?