Originally Posted by waynet

I am not flaming anyone. I wrote my observations on last nights debate being as honest as I can. I understand some will disagree with me and attempt to smear my post. It does not matter,those were my thoughts and feelings,what can I say. I will repeat that I found the audience despicable in their behaviors. Some of you can disparage my remarks but I honestly believe the tea party is bad for America.

OK, I'll leave it at that then, because I can't possibly get into all your thoughts as I can't wrap my head around your observations. We see what we want to see, I guess and that's that.

Originally Posted by waynet

I am not flaming anyone. I wrote my observations on last nights debate being as honest as I can. I understand some will disagree with me and attempt to smear my post. It does not matter,those were my thoughts and feelings,what can I say. I will repeat that I found the audience despicable in their behaviors. Some of you can disparage my remarks but I honestly believe the tea party is bad for America.

I honestly do not understand why you think that ordinary people, who are tired of DC. professional politicians, are bad for America. I do not understand why people feel that getting our spending priorities in order and reducing our debt is wrong. Do you think it is alright to spend our grandchildren's future?

Why do you portray the Tea Party as the boogie man? I think liberal democrats are afraid that America will wake up and vote all these bums out of office, and I mean R's and D's.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

A "few members" (of the audience) yelled "yeah", at the asked question, not the candidate's response, about a man who refuses to buy health care and now requires extraordinary care, being left to his own deivices, and that comprises the whole of the Tea Party?

The audience only applauded when Ron Paul spoke for people taking personal responsibility for their lives.

Really grasping for straws here, you guys.

The demonization express is chugging away...............

Richie....

It is was it is....yes this was billed as a Tea Party debate and members of the Tea Party did indicate that the man should be left to die. Even Rick Perry was shocked.

There was and still is no demonetization in the original post nor this one. And I am frankly surprised you would make such a statement.

Originally Posted by cologal

Richie....

It is was it is....yes this was billed as a Tea Party debate and members of the Tea Party did indicate that the man should be left to die. Even Rick Perry was shocked.

There was and still is no demonetization in the original post nor this one. And I am frankly surprised you would make such a statement.

You're trying to paint an entire organization with the shouts of a few. That's pretty much demonizing the entire organization, as I said. I'm sorry

I could say that the words of the leftist radicals like Bill Ayers and Shirley Chisholm represent the true nature of the Democrats. Now you would reject that, and you would be right. But they are or were in your political party. So, by your logic, I can comfortably say that.

Originally Posted by rubicon

methinks you mis-characterize this exercise. This is a choice of pro-life vis a vis pro-death but rather a pro-life pro-choice scenario and a proper one.

It is perfectly fine with me if a 30 something decides to end his/her life by either ignoring insurance coverage or living a risky life, i.e. speeding, drinking illegal drugs, promiscuous sexual propensities.

It is quite another to have another person make a decision for a human being before that human being has an opportunity to speak for him or herself.

The comparison shown during the debate were mis-leading and I am surprised not one of the candidates jumped on this

Perhaps I could have drawn the comparison in a better way.

So I will try... The premise here was the crowd didn't want to pay for this guy's hospital bill because he didn't have insurance... That is pretty much in line with the Republican and Tea Party's stance on birth control and abortion. "We shouldn't have to pay for that." Ok but the ramifications of that could be that a child is born. But then there is the assault on entitlement's, of course not all entitlements, but specifically welfare and Medicaid. "We don't want to pay for welfare for these kids." Had we paid for the birth control or at least had access to low cost birth control the entitlement bill might be lower. The Republicans have an all out assault on Planned Parenthood Clinics including those who do not provide abortions.

I one specific discussion with a Tea Party supporter revolved around entitlements like Pel grants. I said to I had helped my nephews with the college and he said "Well I shouldn't have to pay for that." But I asked him did his son receive any public funds helping pay his current college fees....to which he replied no. Unfortunately, for him, he was trapped in a lie..his son did get Pel grants and I knew it. So I asked him why was it ok for me to have to pay for his son and it was not ok for him to have to pay for my nephew? His answer was to walk away. So its the same old story....NOT FOR ME!

Returning to the point at hand.....the 30 year old without insurance. The Tea Party is pretty upset about the Federal Mandate that requires everyone to have insurance....to the point of filing lawsuits. It would appear that you all want people to have a choice but suffer death if you make the wrong one.

I found this statement odd.... It is quite another to have another person make a decision for a human being before that human being has an opportunity to speak for him or herself. You could have a living will which calls out what you want at the end of life but if you didn't have one then, using your logic, we could pull the plug. Right?

Originally Posted by RichieLion

You're trying to paint an entire organization with the shouts of a few. That's pretty much demonizing the entire organization, as I said. I'm sorry

I could say that the words of the leftist radicals like Bill Ayers and Shirley Chisholm represent the true nature of the Democrats. Now you would reject that, and you would be right. But they are or were in your political party. So, by your logic, I can comfortably say that.

Bill Ayers.....to coin one of your favorite pharses REJECTED.

And as hard as it is for me to say Rick Perry is on my side.

Originally Posted by billethkid

Like most special interest groups, the few prejudiced anti Tea Party folk, seek out only the negatives.

How about the rest of what the Tea Party or anybody proposes that is positive? That is intended to be for the betterment of our Country?

I know. Why would anybody want to promote the majority good stuff...it does not work for or against a partisan need to regurgitate on any subject they choose to underscore.

Of course one can be against abortion but for capital punishment of the guilty.

The two issues are so not related it is quite amusing to watch some create a bridge between the two.

It can only be meaningful on a case by case, specific example. Lumping into a broad category to make a general statement doesn't work for too many controversial issues.

Trying to make a right or wrong assignation via a political position is so.....POLITICAL!!! Hence has nothing to do with right or wrong. Just promoting the party line.

btk

I saw something that was quite upsetting happen at the TEA PARTY debate....

So that makes me.....

Like most special interest groups, the few prejudiced anti Tea Party folk, seek out only the negatives

Seriously.....

Originally Posted by RichieLion

A "few members" (of the audience) yelled "yeah", at the asked question, not the candidate's response, about a man who refuses to buy health care and now requires extraordinary care, being left to his own deivices, and that comprises the whole of the Tea Party?

The audience only applauded when Ron Paul spoke for people taking personal responsibility for their lives.

Really grasping for straws here, you guys.

The demonization express is chugging away...............

I did not hear anyone booing when the people were yelling YES and YEAH to the let him die statement. Ususally when someone says something THAT stupid, the rest of the audience boos. Maybe they agreed buy had the sense to not yell YES!!

cologal, I was merely pointing out that statistically, most commentary is what people do not like. As the saying(s) used to go one could do a sterling job 363 days of the year, yet the boss will comment on the one day when things did not go right.

As a challenge....because I really don't know....but would be willing to bet...if one could research with the objective of summarizing what it is that each party...D, R, tea party, etc ....stand for or do that which is good for the USA...my bet is there WILL undoubtedly be much in common.

Politics being what it is, when it comes to ANY organization except their own, they will ALWAYS talk about the negative....ALWAYS....other wise it would not be political....eh?

btk

would it make a difference to the tea party if the 30 year old had just lost his job and with it his health insurance and had 2 young children? Or is it assumed that just because the guy had no insurance he is a bum,a nobody,a druggie?

Originally Posted by cologal

Bill Ayers.....to coin one of your favorite pharses REJECTED.

And as hard as it is for me to say Rick Perry is on my side.

If you don't think Bill Ayers votes a straight Democrat ticket, you're dreaming. I have every right, if I'm to argue like you do, to count him as representative of the Democrat Party.

Originally Posted by ladydoc

I did not hear anyone booing when the people were yelling YES and YEAH to the let him die statement. Ususally when someone says something THAT stupid, the rest of the audience boos. Maybe they agreed buy had the sense to not yell YES!!

Most people are respectable enough in a debate not to yell anything. I know I wouldn't. I want to hear what's being said by the candidates, not the yahoo sitting near me.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Most people are respectable enough in a debate not to yell anything. I know I wouldn't. I want to hear what's being said by the candidates, not the yahoo sitting near me.

I guess TP folks (hey- I just realized that Tea Party is TP...lol. Juvenile, I grant you, but amusing) are not as vocal as other folks. Every political thing I ever attended had yeahs and boos...

Here's the real problem.

The people in that audience were hand-picked by the Tea Party. If you were a Democrat, you couldn't get in. Nothing inherently wrong with that because they were the ones organizing the debate.

But when it's your name on the marquee, you have to be prepared for what happens under that marquee and a couple of people inthat crowd gave the Tea Party a VERY bad name - don't know how long it'll stick but you can be damn sure there are political strategists who have that footage on the video equivalent of 'speed dial' to call up whenever they want.

Not too many people seemed to notice that Ron Paul said "No..." and was trying to continue when those few shouts of "Yes!" went up. (Jon Stewart, it might suprise you to know, DID point that out)

Just as the Republicans were risking being demonized as hating children with the infamous "trying to classify ketchup as a vegetable" debacle back in the early 1980s, the Tea Party risks having their credibility tarnished if not wiped out if they don't repudiate these kinds of things.

I'm kinda surprised Michelle Bachmann hasn't been tarred and feathered over her opposition to the HPV vaccination when she said she wanted to (paraphrasing) "leave that choice to parents" - with the logical follow-up being "Do you believe it's proper parenting to leave your children at higher risk of cervical cancer when a simple one-time shot will eliminate the one of the risk factors" or more inflammatory like "Why do you support exposing our children tohigher cancer risks?"

Policing your own. It's VERY important when it comes to credibility.

It's not going to matter anyway DJ. It's very inconsequential. Bringing up the reactions of a few people in an audience is not going to be very dramatic a year from now. It'll be painfully obscure and old news. It's just amusing for us political geeks to banter over now while it's too early for any real fireworks.