Rex Kickass

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Apr 10, 2010 -> 11:01 PM) Between the regular folks, yes, however I've been following national media here and Polish media no one seems to be questioning the fact it was an accident. The BBC last night was mentioning that they were trying to land in extremely poor visibility and the tower recommended diverting to a different airport and the pilot refused. This still really does suck all around.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 10, 2010 -> 10:00 AM) I don't understand. Do you think they let Obama and Biden fly together on a regular basis? Or do you think they make them take separate planes and separate routings if they are travelling to the same place? Sorta like they take one cabinet member in the chain of presidential succession and put them in an undisclosed location during the State of the Union?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 9, 2010 -> 09:20 PM) That is an incredible double standard. If they aren't a political party, how are they going to have politicians? As for what they stand for, if the name doesn't tell you what they stand for, there is nothing I can tell you past that. If that's a double standard, how is expecting a nebulous movement with no national leaders or direction to have the same respect as national political organizations not a double standard? Like it or not, the good work your Tea Party organization might be doing is always going to be drowned out by the bats*** crazy people who make headlines with their outrageousness as long as your organization has no national face and no national direction but demand national coverage. I don't know it you noticed, but crazy usually speaks louder than good. That's sort of my point. You can't have it both ways.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 9, 2010 -> 10:33 PM) They're not liberal, utopian, redistribution of wealth, everyone needs to be equal in society people (oh, wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... GOVERNMENT SAVES!!!), therefore, they're nutbags without a leader. These kind of posts are exactly why I stop responding to you in the Filibuster. It's funny, I think you have lots of valid points to make in these discussions, and when we talk about this stuff via instant message - I always really appreciate the discussion. I wish you could bring that here, and this place might become a more interesting place to have discussions.

This is something that's truly stunning. Do you think Obama and Biden are allowed to fly together on the same plane?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 9, 2010 -> 06:09 PM) Is that really a bad thing? It's not a good thing if you want your movement to survive. Because it allows you to be characterized by the most extreme elements in your movement. Because right now the leaders are the people who own the websites. And the owner of teaparty.org was two weeks ago saying that there were no racial slurs at his tea party rallies.... two months after he was photographed holding a sign that said "N****R" on it at one of his own rallies. Right now, that guy is the face of that movement. Eric Erickson (Mr Redstate himself), a guy that threatened (jokingly or not, not honestly sure) that requiring phosphate free dishwashing detergent was going to be the straw that broke the camel's back when it comes to armed revolution aimed at taming the government. Those people are your representative faces of the Tea Party. If that's who you want running your movement, feel free. But when that plus Michelle Malkin is the face of your organization, don't come crying about respect when you are compared to a bunch of crazy people - because thats the face of your movement. For every Al Sharpton, the Democrats have Barack Obama. For every Bob Dornan, the Republicans have John McCain. For every Glenn Beck/Michelle Malkin/Eric Erickson, the Tea Party has....?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 08:08 PM) Great example of bias in reporting. They stand for lots of things so now they are some how they have no aim. When the Democrats do it, it is called a large umbrella. If you don't know the big things the tea party's stand for, its because you haven't paid attention, or want to dismiss them easily. I think it has more to do with the fact that the Tea Party "movement" is a "movement" and not a party. The "movement" does not speak with one voice. It does not have one or a few leaders who you can point to and say this is the person who represents the vision of the current state of the movement. Individual "tea party" movements stand for things, but there is no national movement stance on any one thing - I think that's the issue here. I can point to that with the Democrats - Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, even Tim Kaine. I can point to that with the Republicans - Boehner, McConnell, to a lesser extent McCain, Palin and Steele. Please name me one "tea party" leader.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 03:39 PM) I was a bit wrong in my assumption Rex, it seems as if it is pretty split down the middle (but Republican and Independents as opposed to Republican and Democrats) according to a recent gallup poll in regards to who considers themselves a member of the tea party: New Fox News poll asked people if they have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the Tea Party among other parties, people and government apparatuses. 36% thought favorably of the Tea Party. 49% thought favorably of the IRS. Just thought that was kinda funny and tangentially related. http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/040810...HC_2010_web.pdf

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 05:01 PM) is teabagging an accepted term now? Depends on what bar you go to.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 03:39 PM) I was a bit wrong in my assumption Rex, it seems as if it is pretty split down the middle (but Republican and Independents as opposed to Republican and Democrats) according to a recent gallup poll in regards to who considers themselves a member of the tea party: That pull was what smacked me as so ingenuous. Democrats consist of 8% of that 51%. Also Gallup, in depth, about the independent number: In other words, people who lean toward the Dem side consist of the 8% who identify as Democrats and the 13% of the independents who say they tend to lean more Dem (by my rough math, that would be about 5.5% of the total number of tea party members). In fact by my math, if you look at the Gallup data with all the crosstabs, it seems like 84% of the tea party members lean Republican, even if nearly half of them don't self identify by party.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 03:23 PM) I think you are right in regards to the polls, but I had seen where Callup also did a similar poll and had very similar results to the Rasmussen one that I posted, hence why I posted it. And you are dead on, the poll companies can easily significant the way the results turn out by the demographic they ask, the tone of the questions they ask, etc. I saw the Gallup poll, and I think it got talked about in the way that it would get the most attention, but a lot of the reaction there was spin. Gallup said 24% or something like that was sympathetic, but that doesn't mean they are teabaggers or whatever they are. The Quinnipiac poll asked people if they thought they were part of the Tea Party movement - only 13% identified as tea party members. I think the truth is that "Tea Party" is code for Republican or lean Republican these days, for people who don't want to admit it.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 02:57 PM) I did think that the fact that more people stood behind the Tea Party as opposed to Obama was quite interesting though because I think when most people think about the Tea Party (and this is me making a pure assumption so I could be completely wrong) they think of Palin who wasn't all that liked recently. However, I think in this atmosphere (the tea party), the general consensus is that she brings a fresh perspective and voice that many many middle of the road American's (including women) can truly relate to. And I was reading a couple opinion articles talking about how the Tea Party could actually become its own political party but I think we know that will not happen. Right now it is distancing itself from being an official tie to the Republican party but I think we all know it certainly leans farther to the right than it does the left. I think there's a couple caveats to the poll. Rasmussen has developed a significant bent to the right in their polling. The degree that they shift the perception of popular opinion is pretty astounding. I'm not disputing their methodology or anything like that, but I will say that I've become pretty suspicious of whatever they put out. I think its pretty clear that Rasmussen has an agenda in how they poll. The generic congressional ballot for the last week. YouGov/Pollmetrix - Dems 47, GOP 44 Gallup - Dems 46, GOP 46 Rasmussen - Dems 38, GOP 47. They consistently poll to the right, generally between 5 and 10 points higher than nearly every other pollster. (BTW, I also think the left leaning YouGov poll is s*** because of their methodology). They also seem to push for people to make a decision. I've never seen any other pollster have every single Obama approval poll have 0% with no opinion, but thats what Ras does. 53-47 for disapproval right now, when nobody else is showing a spread in either direction of more than 4 or 5 points, and no other pollster shows him upside down by more than a point or two unless its a s***ty internet poll (Zogby and the left leaning YouGov should never be included in the same sentence with other, better pollsters.) Is it possible Ras is right? Maybe, but I think they use models that overestimate the presence and power of people who would fit into the tea party mold.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 06:21 PM) We'll see if it's right of course, but I found this argument that Sarah Palin is very likely to be the Republican Nominee in 2012 to be an accurate summation of my feelings right now. It helps that these stops are being wildly promoted by major news outlets, to the point where you have a host on the network simulcasting their show from the event and promoting it.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 02:45 PM) The Tea Party movement seems to be growing steam. While it isn't technically tied to the Republican party, it certainly seems that as of now it has rallied up the Republican base and that the Republican party will be making some serious noise come November. Interesting, since most everyone had been dismissing this movement to ignoring it in the main-stream media. The problem with this movement is it doesn't have any leaders of any consequence (or at least any supporter would admit to having as a leader), and it doesn't have any real purpose or aim. I can tell you what the Democratic Party stands for and what they would want to do on a substantive level, I can do the same with Republicans (in most cases), I can even do the same with Socialists, the Green Party folks and many other third party and non-aligned party movements. I can't do it with the Tea Party, because I just don't know. I think that makes it easy to say I stand for the "Tea Party" because there's nothing to stand alongside with.

Girls, you're all pretty?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 05:19 PM) The people who really wanted to do it finally had the political capital to go all in. Mix it with some dubious intelligence and it became relatively justifiable to a lot of people. Bring up the question of why we didn't just do it all back in the early 90's, but that doesn't change any of the realities surrounding the '03 invasion. Because George HW (Poppa) Bush realized a weakened Iraq with a stable totalitarian regime was better for the world than an unstable Iraq with relatively little government in an area that has a hotly sought after natural resource (oil.) I believe the theory is that its better to have a stable something awful that isn't really threatening to an unstable not much of anything that weakens the states around it, or invites other states (read: Iran) to play a larger regional influence than what was in the United States' interest.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 03:31 PM) Makes me wonder... if it's been done once, it's probably been done before... by both parties. All I'm saying is if Steele was from Jordan and tried to pull something like this in Michigan in 2007, he'd be in Gitmo right now. This was just a way to fake fundraising numbers, and help the state party raise more money than is otherwise legal. If the DNC did this, it would be horrible too, I think. There are all sorts of back channel ways to funnel money into a campaign if its needed, but this just strikes of plain money laundering.

Everytime the Republican party argues about "accounting tricks" and "fiscal responsibility," just think about this story: Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/04/07/former-r.../#ixzz0kRbbSTEy

Senator Tom Coburn ®: Don't believe everything you see on FOX News, Nancy Pelosi is nice. http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...ews.php?ref=fpa

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 6, 2010 -> 01:07 AM) The Dennis Wilson/Charles Manson connection is actually fairly deep and interesting. Wilson bacame accidentally involved with the Manson Family after picking a coupe of them up when they were hitchhiking, and manson and several Family members then ended up moving into Wilson's house and sponging off of him until he figured out they were bad news and abandoned his house to get away from them. Wilson actually introduced Manson to musician Terry Melcher, who owned the house that the Sharon Tate murders took place in. Supposedly, Wilson always carried guilt over having introduced Manson to the circle of musicians and actors that may have ultimately led to the murders. I always thought the Beach Boys' version of "Learn to Submit" was pretty good actually. Although I think they called it "Never Learn Not To Love" or something like that.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/...0,5593120.story

160K jobs added this month. Most in three years. Less than the Street expected, but fewer census jobs added than expected as well.

Balta, when I first saw that, I thought it was an April Fool's joke. Turns out, I guess its not. I'm kinda speechless.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 1, 2010 -> 06:54 PM) The Dems are going to lose seats in November if for no other reason than the fact that they won more seats than is feasible for them to hold in 2008. That. A wave did crest, and there will be some pushback this year. I think its entirely reasonable and probably realistic to see a 55-45 Senate balance, and a 15-20 seat loss in the House. But the Republicans crested with Scott Brown IMO, and they're painted in a corner as to what they can realistically achieve in government this year since they've basically established their position on any issue is No.

Members of the anti-government Hutaree terrorist organization that were recently arrested over the weekend, have decided to oppose government by asking for public defenders.