Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    [QUOTE]Colin Powell was tolerated until he started voicing his own opinion.  as soon as he criticized McCain for picking Palin, he was lambasted.  Accused of backing Obama because they had the same skin color.  [/QUOTE]

    Colin Powell was celebrated by the right as a successful military man turned statesman until he proved to be just another self-aggrandizing statist politician. It's not about the color of the skin, it's about professing and adhering to conservative principles. In this regard Colin Powell was an abject failure.

    Ironically, it is the left that far more concerned with race and ethnicity.

    Look at how the left tried to destroy Justice Clarence Thomas. Look at the name calling that takes place any time a person of color speaks up for conservative values.

    The tea party is first and foremost an organization devoted to promoting the fiscal health of the United States of America. People of all colors are and always have been welcome in this effort. If that were not true I would not be a supporter.

     

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AlleyCatBruin. Show AlleyCatBruin's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to JacksBadDay's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why does Alley use a gross and lewd sexual reference when describing people?  Who does he think he is? President Obama?

    [/QUOTE]


    Reported.

    [/QUOTE]

    Awwwwww.......did I hurt the little conservative evangelical's feelings? lol

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    [QUOTE]Awwwwww.......did I hurt the little conservative evangelical's feelings? lol[/QUOTE]

    Your hatred of those who do not have the same beliefs as you has been duly noted.

     

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    [QUOTE]Colin Powell was tolerated until he started voicing his own opinion.  as soon as he criticized McCain for picking Palin, he was lambasted.  Accused of backing Obama because they had the same skin color. 

    Colin Powell was celebrated by the right as a successful military man turned statesman until he proved to be just another self-aggrandizing statist politician. It's not about the color of the skin, it's about professing and adhering to conservative principles. In this regard Colin Powell was an abject failure.

    Ironically, it is the left that far more concerned with race and ethnicity.

    Look at how the left tried to destroy Justice Clarence Thomas. Look at the name calling that takes place any time a person of color speaks up for conservative values.

    The tea party is first and foremost an organization devoted to promoting the fiscal health of the United States of America. People of all colors are and always have been welcome in this effort. If that were not true I would not be a supporter.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The emphasis on 'fiscal health' is a sham. The true agenda of the Tea Party movement is, pure and simple, resentment of the President based on his race.  His opponents in the US Confederacy bitterly oppose his very existence; thus everything he does is suspect, foolish, or treasonous.  

    Angry sheep spouting nothing but boiler plate bumper sticker slogans. When pressed beyond their slogans they have not an inkling of a clue what they are for, or how they would address anything they deem as a problem.  All they know is what they hate.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/who-broke-washington/george-w-bush-he-gave-rise-to-the-tea-party-20131003

    The tea party began as a reaction to spending under Bush. So, unless you're position is that the tea party founders were able to look into the future and see that then Senator Obama was going to become president it's hardly possible that it's a racist organization.

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    Is the entire Tea Party racist? No.

    Is it an innocent coincidence that the only sitting President to have his birth and legitimacy questioned for the first few years of his Presidency just so happened to also be the first black President? Hell no.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    [QUOTE]Is the entire Tea Party racist? No.

    Is it an innocent coincidence that the only sitting President to have his birth and legitimacy questioned for the first few years of his Presidency just so happened to also be the first black President? Hell no.[/QUOTE]

    Is the entire Democrat Party racist? No.

    Is it an innocent coincidence that Democrats were the party of Jim Crow and Bull Connor?

    Is it an innocent coincedence that the Democrats were the party of the KKK?

    Is it an innocent coincidence that black people have suffered and continue to suffer under policies and programs just happen to have been put into place under Democrat leadership?

    Hell no.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    So the defense of racist birthers within the last few years is that sixty years ago, when the demographics of the parties were different, there were racist democrats?

    Really?

    Ok, all Christians are evil torturing murderrs beause the inquisition shut up.

    Really, SB, you're falling off in the logic department.

     

     

     

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    Is it an innocent coincidence that black people have suffered and continue to suffer under policies and programs just happen to have been put into place under Democrat leadership?

    Hell no.

     



    And that is knowingly dishonest.

    It's one thing to say that Democrats passed misguided policies, which you choose to blame for black people "suffering"...

    ...but if you're going to claim Demorats deliberately passed the policies to hurt black people, you're a liar no better than skeeter/tvoter...   

     

     

    So much for the boards...

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [QUOTE]Colin Powell was tolerated until he started voicing his own opinion.  as soon as he criticized McCain for picking Palin, he was lambasted.  Accused of backing Obama because they had the same skin color.  [/QUOTE]

    Colin Powell was celebrated by the right as a successful military man turned statesman until he proved to be just another self-aggrandizing statist politician. It's not about the color of the skin, it's about professing and adhering to conservative principles. In this regard Colin Powell was an abject failure.

    Ironically, it is the left that far more concerned with race and ethnicity.

    Look at how the left tried to destroy Justice Clarence Thomas. Look at the name calling that takes place any time a person of color speaks up for conservative values.

    The tea party is first and foremost an organization devoted to promoting the fiscal health of the United States of America. People of all colors are and always have been welcome in this effort. If that were not true I would not be a supporter.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Shutting down the government and threatening default is somehow promoting the fiscal health of the country?  And please define fiscal health.

    in any event, the tea party was a ruse started by a few rich people to con people who don't know any better into supporting policies that benefit the rich at the expense of the rank and file members of the tea party.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [QUOTE]Is the entire Tea Party racist? No.

    Is it an innocent coincidence that the only sitting President to have his birth and legitimacy questioned for the first few years of his Presidency just so happened to also be the first black President? Hell no.[/QUOTE]

    Is the entire Democrat Party racist? No.

    Is it an innocent coincidence that Democrats were the party of Jim Crow and Bull Connor?

    Is it an innocent coincedence that the Democrats were the party of the KKK?

    Is it an innocent coincidence that black people have suffered and continue to suffer under policies and programs just happen to have been put into place under Democrat leadership?

    Hell no.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Huh?  white southerners joined the Democratic Party because.... Lincoln was a republican.  They then ran from democratic party because of the Civil rights movement.  All of those KKK/democrats ran to the republican party.

    do you truly not know this?

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    [QUOTE]...but if you're going to claim Demorats deliberately passed the policies to hurt black people, you're a liar no better than skeeter/tvoter...[/QUOTE]

    Let's call it "results based racism." Whether intentional or not these "misguided" policies have been disasterous for the majority of the black community. And yet there is no introspection, no suggestion from the left that perhaps these policies are failing, that something needs to change. No, what we see instead is the scapegoating of a bunch of people who, based on the evidence, on the whole want everyone in this nation to succeed regardless of their skin color.

    So, what am I to believe? I know that the Democrats are lying about racism on the right because I am part of the right and I know what we believe. So, if they can do that instead of honestly working with the right to resolve differences and fix the problems that their policies have created then why shouldn't I believe that there is a sub-current of racism in their actions?

     

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JacksBadDay's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why does Alley use a gross and lewd sexual reference when describing people?  Who does he think he is? President Obama?

    [/QUOTE]


    Reported.

    [/QUOTE]

    Awwwwww.......did I hurt the little conservative evangelical's feelings? lol

    [/QUOTE]

    No, you didn't hurt my feelings.  I actually feel sad for you.  Your life's experience seems bracketed by insulting people.  It is a really sad existence.

    When you use a term like "bagger", you try to label those you disagree with with a slur, as to diminish them, but end up just cheapening yourself.  You lose credibility, like Obama, when he did it.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JacksBadDay's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why does Alley use a gross and lewd sexual reference when describing people?  Who does he think he is? President Obama?

    [/QUOTE]


    Reported.

    [/QUOTE]

    Awwwwww.......did I hurt the little conservative evangelical's feelings? lol

    [/QUOTE]

    No, you didn't hurt my feelings.  I actually feel sad for you.  Your life's experience seems bracketed by insulting people.  It is a really sad existence.

    When you use a term like "bagger", you try to label those you disagree with with a slur, as to diminish them, but end up just cheapening yourself.  You lose credibility, like Obama, when he did it.

    [/QUOTE]

    But wasn't it the TEA party people who showed up at rallies with Tea Bags? 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JacksBadDay's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why does Alley use a gross and lewd sexual reference when describing people?  Who does he think he is? President Obama?

    [/QUOTE]


    Reported.

    [/QUOTE]

    Awwwwww.......did I hurt the little conservative evangelical's feelings? lol

    [/QUOTE]

    This is completely convuluted.

    The moderators allow the term "baggers" in the headline of this thread as well as in several posts.

    skeeter's post that was reported by JBD and removed did not even use that term.

    If the moderators are okay with us using the term, then they certainly should not be removing posts that do not even use the term but just asked a question.

    Just speculation, but perhaps another instance of a reported post not being read before it was removed.

    skeeter was definitely wronged here. If I were him, I would request by post be re-instated.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JacksBadDay's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why does Alley use a gross and lewd sexual reference when describing people?  Who does he think he is? President Obama?

    [/QUOTE]


    Reported.

    [/QUOTE]

    Awwwwww.......did I hurt the little conservative evangelical's feelings? lol

    [/QUOTE]

    No, you didn't hurt my feelings.  I actually feel sad for you.  Your life's experience seems bracketed by insulting people.  It is a really sad existence.

    When you use a term like "bagger", you try to label those you disagree with with a slur, as to diminish them, but end up just cheapening yourself.  You lose credibility, like Obama, when he did it.

    [/QUOTE]

    skeeter,

    I believe ACB was not referring to you but to JackBadDay with that remark.

    As for your post being removed, it was wrong. Please read my above post.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

    Colin Powell was tolerated until he started voicing his own opinion.  as soon as he criticized McCain for picking Palin, he was lambasted.  Accused of backing Obama because they had the same skin color. 

     

    Colin Powell was celebrated by the right as a successful military man turned statesman until he proved to be just another self-aggrandizing statist politician. It's not about the color of the skin, it's about professing and adhering to conservative principles. In this regard Colin Powell was an abject failure.

    Ironically, it is the left that far more concerned with race and ethnicity.

    Look at how the left tried to destroy Justice Clarence Thomas. Look at the name calling that takes place any time a person of color speaks up for conservative values.

    The tea party is first and foremost an organization devoted to promoting the fiscal health of the United States of America. People of all colors are and always have been welcome in this effort. If that were not true I would not be a supporter.

     

     

     



    SB,

    I read this post much earlier. I wanted to take my time to respond. I did find something that is different then the responses from the other progressives. I am interested in your take on it if you care to respond.

      

    "For a movement that’s helped to reshape the Republican Party—and by extension, reshape American politics—we know shockingly little about the people who make up the Tea Party. While some in the GOP once hoped to co-opt the movement, it’s increasingly unclear which group—the Tea Party or establishment Republicans—is running the show. Politicians have largely relied on conjecture and assumption to determine the positions and priorities of Tea Party activists.

    Until now. The results of the first political science survey of Tea Party activists show that the constituency isn’t going away any time soon—and Republicans hoping the activists will begin to moderate their stances should prepare for disappointment. Based out of the College of William and Mary, the report surveyed more than 11,000 members of FreedomWorks, one of the largest and most influential Tea Party groups. The political scientists also relied on a separate survey of registered voters through the YouGov firm to compare those who identified with the Tea Party movement to those Republicans who did not. (Disclosure: The political scientist leading the survey was my father, Ronald Rapoport, with whom I worked in writing this piece.)

    For the first time, we can now look at what a huge sample of Tea Party activists believe, as well as examine how those who identify with the Tea Party differ from their establishment GOP counterparts. Here are the three biggest takeaways from the study:

    1. Tea Party activists are not Republicans.

    Republicans are now reliant on the Tea Party. While the number of Tea Party supporters has declined since 2010, they still make up around half of Republicans, according to NBC/Wall Street Journal surveys. More important, they are the most active supporters when it comes to voting in primaries, volunteering on campaigns, and participating in various other activities political parties are reliant upon. Seventy-three percent of Republicans who attended a political rally or meeting identified with the Tea Party. The activists are vehemently anti-Democratic. Among the FreedomWorks sample, only 3 percent of people voted for Obama or a Democratic House candidate in 2008, and less than 6 percent identify as either independents or Democrats.

    Yet the Tea Party activists doing work for the Republicans are surprisingly negative about the party they’re helping. While 70 percent of FreedomWorks activists identify as Republican, another 23 percent reject the Republican label entirely and instead, when asked which political party they identify with, choose “other.” Asked if they considered themselves more Republican or more a Tea Party member, more than three-quarters chose Tea Party.

    Given that so many don’t identify with the GOP, it’s perhaps not surprising that the activists also rate the party they vote for so poorly. Given a spectrum of seven choices from “outstanding” to “poor,” only 9 percent of activists rated the Republican Party in the top two categories. Meanwhile, 17 percent put the party in the bottom two. In total, 32 percent rated the party in one of the three positive categories while a whopping 40 percent rated the party in one of the negative ones.

    In other words, the activists providing a huge amount of the labor and enthusiasm for Republican candidates are, at best, lukewarm on the party they’re voting for. Few are concerned about what their impact on the future of the GOP will be. Which brings us to:

    2. Tea Party activists aren’t nearly as concerned about winning. ADVERTISEMENT

    Or at least they’re significantly more concerned with ideological purity than with political pragmatism. The survey asked FreedomWorks activists if they agreed or disagreed with the statement, “When we feel strongly about political issues, we should not be willing to compromise with our political opponents.” Altogether, more than 80 percent agreed to some extent. Thirty-two percent of respondents “agree strongly” with the statement. Meanwhile, less than 10 percent disagreed even “slightly.” In another series of questions sent out to FreedomWorks activists, the survey asked whether they would prefer a candidate with whom they agree on most important issues but who polls far behind the probable Democratic nominee or a candidate with whom they agree “on some of the most important issues” but who’s likely to win. More than three-fourths of respondents preferred the candidate who was more likely to lose but shared their positions.

    In other words, the Tea Party cares more about what nominees believe than whether they can win—and compromising on politics means compromising on principle.

    The findings help explain what’s happened in so many GOP primary races.  Both nationally and at the state level, moderate GOP officeholders found themselves with primary challengers. The Tea Party has helped propel several upstart candidacies, like Christine O’Donnell’s infamous effort to win Delaware’s Senate seat or more recently, Richard Mourdock’s successful challenge to sitting Senator Dick Lugar. In both of those cases, and several others, the Tea Party candidate has proved too extreme for the general election and lost. But despite the losses, the push toward conservative purity continues. A recent New York Times story showed that even House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, seen as the leader with the most clout in the Tea Party movement, has been unable to move the faction's members in his party into more moderate terrain. In light of these survey results, that makes sense—Tea Party elected officials are simply reflecting their supporters. Meanwhile, those left in the establishment fear the party’s new direction.

    3. Attempts to bridge the gap between establishment Republicans and the Tea Party are doomed to fail.

    There’s no shortage of moves from Republicans to keep the Tea Party in the fold while shifting things more to the center. After the dismal GOP performance in the 2012 elections, establishment figures began pushing back against the Tea Party. Famous consultant Karl Rove announced a new political action committee designed to challenge extreme GOP candidates with more marketable ones. The national party even put out a report after the 2012 losses that pushed for more pragmatic candidates that could have a broader appeal. As noted, even Eric Cantor is trying.

    But the gap between the two groups is huge. In the YouGov survey the study uses, more than two-thirds of Tea Partiers put themselves in the two most conservative categories on economic policy, social policy, and overall policy. Only 23 percent of non-Tea Partiers place themselves in the most conservative categories on all three issues; nearly 40 percent don’t locate themselves in the most conservative categories for any of the three policy areas.

    Most jarring: On some issues, like abolishing the Department of Education and environmental regulation, the establishment Republicans are actually closer to Democrats than they are to the Tea Party respondents. That’s a gap too large to be overcome by a few political action committees and gestures of goodwill.

    Tea Party activists dominate the Republican Party, and they’re no less willing to compromise with the GOP than they are with Democrats. FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe summed it up nicely in his book title: Hostile Takeover.

    Simply put, the GOP is too reliant on the Tea Party—and based on these survey results, the Tea Party doesn’t care about the GOP’s fate. It cares about moving the political conversation increasingly rightward."

     

    http://prospect.org/article/three-new-facts-about-tea-party

     

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    Makes perfect sense.

    Don't like a white president....it's simply because you disagree with his politics

    Don't like a black president...it's because you're a racist

     

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well said.

    I have been saying this sort of thing since Obama became president.

    He is getting the Jackie Robinson treatment.

    I expected a certain amount of racist behaviour, but never expected them to go to the extremes to make Obama look as bad as possible. The strategy is clear to me, make him to blame for all the countries woes ( indeed maybe even some of other countries woes, too) so that Americans never elect another minority president.

    However, in the process they are making the lot of them look like baffoons and greedy creeps. Which is a shame for the few of them that are actually trying to help.

    [/QUOTE]


    that is exactly how every president has been treated by the opposing side for the last 40 years

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    Hate is a strong word that some use to frame a converation without honest facts.

    I would argue few "hate" Obama and fewer still do so because of his race.

    It's just lazy people that do not want to look at the facts for disagreement with policies that just throw out the "hate and /or racist" and then slim away thinking they won some argument they do  not have the intellect to be in anyway.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Q: Why do the Baggers hate their President?

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hate is a strong word that some use to frame a converation without honest facts.

    I would argue few "hate" Obama and fewer still do so because of his race.

    It's just lazy people that do not want to look at the facts for disagreement with policies that just throw out the "hate and /or racist" and then slim away thinking they won some argument they do  not have the intellect to be in anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree. It's beyond lazy to simply label people as haters because they disagree with ones viewpoint. I don't hate Obama. I don't hate anyone. The only way I could hate someone is if someone personally did physical or emotional harm to me or a loved one. I may disagree with your politics? I may not care for you. I may dislike you. But hate? Nah...don't have the time nor the energy to waste "hating" someone.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share