All My so-called "friends" are GOP/Tea baggers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are calling them narrow minded? Look in the mirror

No, I think OP is right. There are limits. It's one thing to disagree with someone and it's another to have differences that are so major that they make you sick.

Really? Their views make you sick? They aren't killing puppies and punching babies for pete's sake.

You see, in the narrow mindset of the teabagger, the only thing that could make a person objectionable would be "punching a baby or killing puppies". Pretty much everything else is fair game to them.

Why do you right wingers displace your hatred of everyone else by fetishizing embryos and unwanted puppies?

Actually, neither republican nor tea bagger but not a left wing crazy like you!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Pretty much everyone on here has stated that they're perfectly able to remain friends with civil people who hold views that were considered conservative and representative of the GOP pre-2003. So, that means that, yes, the vast majority of us are friends with conservative democrats and/or former republicans in the vein of people like Senators Chafee or Lugar. It also means that nothing Obama has done is despicable, despite being disappointing and out of line with his stated intentions.

It requires money and a PR machine to shift the discourse such that the Tea Party is considered anything other than a fringe extreme viewpoint. Yes, you have Fox News, but the GOP is still somewhat invested in being respected as a rational party so they're not throwing their machine behind this shift of narrative. (Again despite all "RINO" efforts to that effect.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are all of the liberal posters here who are unable to remain friends with republicans also unable, now, to continue to supporting President Obama?

I never have - I didn't vote for him, because there were good indications that he would be the spineless appeaser he is. Now's he's actually boasting about the tax cuts as one of his biggest accomplishments, as if that's what his supporters wanted.

Anonymous wrote:only the most rigid and small minded among us are determined to so viciously label others with different views...

So...there's no viewpoint that would warrant a label like "crazy" or "idiotic" from you? If there is, where is that line? Just 10-20 years ago, every major party politician would have called abolishing the Department of Education crazy, but now that idea is just part of the beautiful rainbow of idealogies you defend.

[Anonymous]

please give me a few good reasons as to why we need a federal department of education? where are these federal elementary schools or federal universities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:please give me a few good reasons as to why we need a federal department of education?

Seriously?? Is this a joke?

[Anonymous]

a PP said that 10-20 years ago, nobody would question a proposal to eliminate the Dept of Ed. Well it was only created by Carter in the late 70s, and Reagan and many republicans have proposed getting rid of it since. I think it is a waste of $70B a year myself, as its role is performed better by state and local govts.

[jdmiller]

do you think it is possible for somebody to be protestant and republican at the same time?

[Anonymous]

jdmiller wrote:do you think it is possible for somebody to be protestant and republican at the same time?

ummm, most of the south (other than AA southern baptist members) meets that definition. what are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, you have Fox News

...for which two of the Rep presidential frontrunners work...

Anonymous wrote:but the GOP is still somewhat invested in being respected as a rational party so they're not throwing their machine behind this shift of narrative. (Again despite all "RINO" efforts to that effect.)

We'll see. They care about getting elected, not being respected. To get elected, they need a position, and for decades now they've defined their position only as to the right of the Dems.

Remember how pissed they were when Clinton took welfare reform from them? - they were actually complaining, making it completely obvious that they didn't care about getting their policies through nearly as much as they care about getting elected. The Dems will keep bargaining against themselves, and even if they hold the White House both parties will be further to right in 5 years than they are now.

O'Reilly's a moderate at Fox now. In 5-10 years, he'll be at CNN or off the air and Beck will be voice of reason at Fox.

[jdmiller]

Anonymous wrote:

jdmiller wrote:do you think it is possible for somebody to be protestant and republican at the same time?

ummm, most of the south (other than AA southern baptist members) meets that definition. what are you talking about?

oww sorry..what I wanted to ask is if it is possible to be DEMOCRATA and christian protestant. Sorry...
I have been living in US for a couple of years and am still learning about all this democrata and republican thing...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so you cannot debate with your friends? I like discussing politics with my liberal and close-minded friends.

Not to speak for the OP, but in my experience most Teabaggers and right-wing folks in general is that they are uninformed about the specifics, disingenuous to the extreme, and get belligerent when challenged. Generally speaking, the belligerence stems from the fact that liberals see wingnuts as wrong, whereas wingnuts see liberals as evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Did you see the unhinged wingnuts in Wisconsin calling for the death of the Governor?

Did you see the unhinged governor of Wisconsin callng for the death of 50 years of rights for the working class and middle class?

Now, now, you're going to make yourself all sweaty. The nurse will be in to fluff your pillows and give you some crushed ice very soon.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. This kind of post is just really juvenile, not funny, not intelligent, not edgey or whatever brand of 'coolness' you are trying to display. I might have been impressed with this kind of attitude in 9th grade but now that I'm an adult, I think it's just stupid and mean. It's the low level of intellectual abilities coupled with insulting school-yard bullying that is so ugly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are calling them narrow minded? Look in the mirror

No, I think OP is right. There are limits. It's one thing to disagree with someone and it's another to have differences that are so major that they make you sick.

Really? Their views make you sick? They aren't killing puppies and punching babies for pete's sake.

Nope, just working to eliminate healthcare for sick kids and disenfranchise minorities. No biggie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:please give me a few good reasons as to why we need a federal department of education? where are these federal elementary schools or federal universities?

Considering that red states are far bigger beneficiaries of federal programs, I think it would serve them right to have it abolished. Enjoy your solely state-funded schools, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas...