Tea Party Is Much Like the Religious Right -- Only More So, Survey Finds

DeMint is a first class asshat. He means that rich white people should have freedom and liberty. If you're a hard working teacher, then you'd better have the moral credentials of a saint. Like anyone in congress should be telling us what our morals should be.

 

Yea? That is the same survey sited in the OP, but I have no idea what you are trying to show here. It does not relate to "They anoint themselves as the voice of America.......".

Why are you trying to show a survey here and requesting someone else to show a survey when they "have little if any meaning and even less predictability of the outcomes they try to foresee"?

 

Wanna see the dems choice as the alternative to Jim Demint?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Greene

Would you rather have a senator who calls for high moral standards for those teaching our children or this guy?

 

Let's see...would I rather be shot to death or stabbed to death. I choose the shooting. Thank goodness for choices!

 

Well, welcome to the real world where choices have to be made. Give me the guy whose only criticism (and dr moen would take every shot he could if there were more issues with Demint) is that he wants "saints" teaching our kids over the guy who was booted out of the Army, has remained on the gov't dole & shows porn to college coeds.
Is the choice really that difficult? Really?

 

Welcome to our real political system where our choices are limited by the 2 parties that have bought and paid for the privilege is what the reality is. But, to your question...

Is the choice that difficult for me? Yes, I think decisions where the only 2 choices are both extremely distasteful are always difficult.

On the one hand I see a guy giving a wink and a nudge to people who want a religious run government (their religion, of course) - making the world safe from fagots and sluts...oh, I mean gays and women having sex out of marriage... and who is also a supporter of the Patriot Act, wiretaps, etc and a military interventionist. And on the other hand is someone who is under a recent felony indictment.

Being someone who is concerned with actual liberties and someone who is anti-felon, yes, it would be a difficult choice for me. It would be much easier to just not think and vote D or R, of course, which is how a lot of people make difficult choices into easy ones.

 

I suppose I'm a bit more pragmatic. I work to change what I can but I am capable of accepting "the way things are" if that is the only alternative.

 

Perplexing dilemma isn't it? Perhaps you should adopt my logic when it come to the 2, and only 2, choices of D or R. Simply look at it in reverse. Decide which party is the most damaging to the largest percentage of citizens and pick the opposite. It's far from the best resolution, but one party represents the few and one doesn't. Unless of course you're rich...then the opposite would be in effect. Take the money and redistribute it or give it all to the top 2%. Oversimplified and over generalized but, that's really all there is to choose from.

 

Take the money and redistribute it.

In other words, you don't want to work for your money, you just want a handout.

 

Yeah you're right on track as usual Sparky. But seriously.
There are those that want handouts and there are those that simply take what everybody else has worked for. Corporate America effectively redistributes the exploited wealth amongst its' top tiers of society. I really don't see much of a difference other than one side is extremely rich and the other side is borderline poverty stricken.
Me personally? I prefer to work for my money...earn it. Not a handout or to effectively steal it from society for my own excess.

 

Unfortunately, it is doubtful we could even realistically raise taxes high enough to pay what we already redistribute let alone add more. 14 or so trillion in the hole. Adding another 1.25 or 1.5 trillion this year. And people still want the government to give more and more without cutting anything they already give.

Just our mandatory spending (entitlements, interest, etc) is almost as much as our total revenue now. And that doesn't include any government agencies, defense, our wars, any discretionary spending, transportation, education or anything else. It is pretty much just entitlement programs like medicare, medicaid, social security, and interest.

So that means we have to raise about a trillion dollars more a year in taxes. Eliminating the Bush tax cut for those over $250K won't even get us 10% of that annual shortfall. Eliminating them for everyone would still only get us to maybe 30 or 40% of that yearly shortfall. And neither would touch that 14 Trillion. It would still get larger every year.

Reality is coming eventually.

 

I would have to be pragmatic in this election if I was a citizen of SC. That means I would probably vote for the possible felon and hope he is convicted and thrown out of Congress before his term is up because I think DeMint's political views are a pretty clear and present danger to the personal freedoms and individual liberties that we should strive to protect for everyone.

 

Somehow I find it hard to believe you would vote for Greene if you were a voter in SC. tomc maybe but not you.

By the way, I watched your Dem senate candidate Guiannoulas (sp?) on Meet the Press this morning. He's some piece of work, isn't he?
How can him doing business with Tony Rezko be a scandal yet BO gets a pass for their land deal? Chicago politics?

 

I have voted for my share of Democrats over the years. And Republicans and Libertarians. No surer way to make me run screaming from a candidate, though, than to put up a religious right Republican on the ballot.

And it's Illinois, it's all Chicago politics. I can tell you this, though, Kirk seems to have done himself no favors with some veterans. The majority of people I work with are veterans and many are none too happy with his claims of being shot at in Iraq. Just Friday, I had a retired Marine tell me there was no way he could "vote for that SOB". This is a retired Marine, mid-middle income, living in rural Southern Illinois...dead square in the conservative demographic.

 

So if you are gay, you are of low moral standards?

 

What are you getting nuts about? I wasnt even your post. That repsonse was for jth.

 

Why in the world would you vote for someone like Greene simply because his opponent has, in your opinion, strong religious beliefs? That's nuts.

 

I think I explained that I think someone who is going to rule based on their religious creeds, whether they be Christian (like me), Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan or whatever, is a clear and present danger to the personal liberties of the citizens of this country.

I don't want anyone being told what professions they can have or what they can and can;t do based upon a legislators' religious morality standards any more than I want to be told I have to grow a beard because not doing so is an affront to God or that I have to close my business on the sabbath or that I have to stop and pray whenever the chanting begins on the loudspeakers.

 

Reality is already here. The odometer on the debt broke long ago and with the current climate of smoke and mirrors there really isn't any point in counting any more. The whole corrupt corporate structure has already swallowed us all. The system is broken and beyond repair. The big boys are just dragging in the last of their chips now creating false economic hopes. Once they're done, the cupboard will be bare with the key criminals relocated somewhere offshore.

 

Are you trying to make your point using extreme examples or has Demint really tried to dictate professions and mandate the growing of beards by residents of SC, along with that other stuff you mentioned? I guess I would have a problem with someone like that myself.