Balta1701 Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 09:09 PM) Christine O'Donnell: Anti-evolution, biblical literalist ignoramus. She called Mike a Senator? I didn't catch that part in my first reading. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 16, 2010 Author Share Posted September 16, 2010 Some narrowing in the Generic Congressional ballot over the course of the week, thanks to a new Politico/Battleground poll showing a tied generic ballot and a PPP poll showing a one point edge for Democrats in the generic ballot. The TPM poll average shows a 5 point edge for the Republicans on the generic ballot. That might still look like a huge gap, but on Monday, that edge was 7.1 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 09:43 AM) http://deadspin.com/5636603/lets-talk-abou...nd-the-sideline What other "reporter" dresses like this? I'm not disagreeing with you, but that's not how she was dressed on that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 12:51 PM) She called Mike a Senator? I didn't catch that part in my first reading. LOL. More craziness: O'DONNELL: They are — they are doing that here in the United States. American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains. So they're already into this experiment. Glad to see the GOP endorsing her now. This is the quality of candidate populist movements based on anger and a good dose of anti-intellectualism get you. Raving idiots. Rand Paul. Christine O'Donnell. Sarah Angle. And the movement is largely swayed by Palin and Beck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 07:42 PM) More craziness: Glad to see the GOP endorsing her now. This is the quality of candidate populist movements based on anger and a good dose of anti-intellectualism get you. Raving idiots. Rand Paul. Christine O'Donnell. Sarah Angle. And the movement is largely swayed by Palin and Beck. Its funny how this is all working out. Tea Party gets going, the GOP decides to co-opt it, they succeed in primaries, and now they will likely bury the GOP's chances of winning the Senate. I'm actually glad to see new blood, but its a little sad that these are the candidates they are coming up with. There has to be better there. In all seriousness, are there any Tea Party-supported candidates that have won primaries so far that are not crazy in the way those three are? I genuinely hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Joe Miller has some pretty terrible ideas, but I wouldn't put him quite into the same category as the other ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Miller_(Alaska_politician) More anti-science crap, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 08:05 PM) Joe Miller has some pretty terrible ideas, but I wouldn't put him quite into the same category as the other ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Miller_(Alaska_politician) More anti-science crap, though. Ideas I disagree with are one thing. Being outright crazy like that trio mentioned earlier is another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) Some of those ideas are pretty crazy. More insanity from O'Donnell, now fully endorsed by the GOP: AIDS Gets Too Much Gov't Money, Condoms Wouldn't Stop It She also has some pretty crazy ideas on porn and masturbation. Also bought into the 'Clinton killed Vince Foster' crap. The Tea Party candidates are simply conservatives. They're on the right-wing fringe end and sort of crazy for the most part, but they back common conservative ideologies. It's not some brand new movement and it never has been. It isn't libertarian. It isn't about more personal freedom. Edited September 17, 2010 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 10:28 PM) Some of those ideas are pretty crazy. More insanity from O'Donnell, now fully endorsed by the GOP: AIDS Gets Too Much Gov't Money, Condoms Wouldn't Stop It She also has some pretty crazy ideas on porn and masturbation. Also bought into the 'Clinton killed Vince Foster' crap. The Tea Party candidates are simply conservatives. They're on the right-wing fringe end and sort of crazy for the most part, but they back common conservative ideologies. It's not some brand new movement and it never has been. It isn't libertarian. It isn't about more personal freedom. What you are saying is true about these three candidates. Its not necessarily true of the movement as a whole. That's part of the problem I see them having, is a lack of cohesion. You basically have the far-right-wing crazy conservatives getting nominated, and they represent some PART of the Tea Party mentality, but its not quite the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 09:05 PM) Joe Miller has some pretty terrible ideas, but I wouldn't put him quite into the same category as the other ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Miller_(Alaska_politician) More anti-science crap, though. He also accepted $14,000 in federal subsidies to grow and then to not grow barley on his farm in Alaska. Yet his position on the federal budget is: The only answer is to return our federal government to the limits prescribed by our Constitution. Somehow I don't think the founders had "giving business people a subsidy for farmland that they own but don't farm" on their mind when they wrote the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 08:59 AM) I don't think anyone should be allowed in the locker room. They should have an area outisde that reporters can ask questions after the players are dressed. this is really the best solution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 07:42 PM) More craziness: Glad to see the GOP endorsing her now. This is the quality of candidate populist movements based on anger and a good dose of anti-intellectualism get you. Raving idiots. Rand Paul. Christine O'Donnell. Sarah Angle. And the movement is largely swayed by Palin and Beck. I wouldn't necessarily put Rand Paul in that category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 01:00 PM) I wouldn't necessarily put Rand Paul in that category. Live in Kentucky for 20 years and have no idea that there's a bit of a drug problem going on in these states? Yeah, that takes some skill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 01:00 PM) I wouldn't necessarily put Rand Paul in that category. Maybe not necessarily anti-intellectual, but definitely on the fringe and extreme side of things. He did argue on National Television this summer that private businesses should have the right to refuse service to people based upon race, when he offered his opinion that Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) Well, this isnt very smart to say: Huckabee Opposes Insurance For People With Pre-Existing Conditions: Their Like a Burnt Down House "It sounds so good, and it's such a warm message to say we're not gonna deny anyone from a preexisting condition," Huckabee explained at the Value Voters Summit today. "Look, I think that sounds terrific, but I want to ask you something from a common sense perspective. Suppose we applied that principle [to] our property insurance. And you can call your insurance agent and say, "I'd like to buy some insurance for my house." He'd say, "Tell me about your house." "Well sir, it burned down yesterday, but I'd like to insure it today." And he'll say "I'm sorry, but we can't insure it after it's already burned." Well, no preexisting conditions." Edited September 17, 2010 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 09:05 PM) Joe Miller has some pretty terrible ideas, but I wouldn't put him quite into the same category as the other ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Miller_(Alaska_politician) More anti-science crap, though. Lisa Murkowski appears to be launching a write-in campaign for the seat tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 07:33 AM) What you are saying is true about these three candidates. Its not necessarily true of the movement as a whole. That's part of the problem I see them having, is a lack of cohesion. You basically have the far-right-wing crazy conservatives getting nominated, and they represent some PART of the Tea Party mentality, but its not quite the same. It's who is being elected and supported under the Tea Party. I'm not seeing any tea party challengers who are not just social conservatives who appear to be deeply ignorant. QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 12:00 PM) I wouldn't necessarily put Rand Paul in that category. I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 04:54 PM) I would. redundant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 12:22 PM) Live in Kentucky for 20 years no thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 I wouldn't put Rand Paul in that category though. I mean he's stepped on his dick a couple of times, sure, but mostly he seems like he knows what he's talking about (not that I agree with most of his views but still). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 08:51 AM) On the one hand, regardless of how she dressed, she shouldn't be subject to harassment or any other ill treatment. There is no excuse for that. On the other hand, I'd agree that if she does dress like that while working, she is clearly using her body to her advantage. And there is nothing wrong with that. In any case, as I said before, there is a really easy solution to all of this. /out of exile You're just jealous. I couldn't help it, the joke was just right there. /exile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 02:27 PM) Well, this isnt very smart to say: Huckabee Opposes Insurance For People With Pre-Existing Conditions: Their Like a Burnt Down House Good old Mike Huckabee, following the example of his lord and savior Jesus. Oh wait. Nevermind. He's doing the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeFabregas Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 He sort of does have a point in that it's not so much insurance as a health care subscription (if coverage is required for those with pre-existing conditions). On the other hand, people don't usually buy property insurance in pools (as many do with health insurance). That's one of the many reasons I'd prefer a single-payer system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Sep 18, 2010 -> 12:06 AM) He sort of does have a point in that it's not so much insurance as a health care subscription (if coverage is required for those with pre-existing conditions). On the other hand, people don't usually buy property insurance in pools (as many do with health insurance). but it's a total contradiction coming from him. i suppose the evangelical neo-cons, compassionate conservatives, had to change their stripes to remain relevant. frankly, it's not a move i respect. Edited September 18, 2010 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Sep 18, 2010 -> 12:06 AM) He sort of does have a point in that it's not so much insurance as a health care subscription (if coverage is required for those with pre-existing conditions). On the other hand, people don't usually buy property insurance in pools (as many do with health insurance). That's one of the many reasons I'd prefer a single-payer system. I know this is a little hyperbole, but Huckabe said anyone with diabetes or cancer is a burnt down house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts