Concerned about gay NFL players? GOP is on it

[Daverino]

Says the guy following me around.

Pretty sure you leave your same pile of shit in every thread around here. Many of us object to the stench of your trolling.

 

[Incorruptible]

Pretty sure you leave your same pile of shit in every thread around here. Many of us object to the stench of your trolling.

How am I a troll? Give me actual evidence.

 

[piasabird]

How about regularly testing for aids? The Union should be all for that.

 

[brycejones]

Says the guy following me around.

Come on support your position...........grow a pair son.

Is Ted Cruz part of the Tea Party or not?

 

[brycejones]

How am I a troll? Give me actual evidence.

I think your posts here are a perfect example of your brand of trolling. You say crap and then when asked to support what you say you run away and refuse to actually back it up. Instead you start name calling and deflecting.

 

[Daverino]

How am I a troll? Give me actual evidence.

Gosh! That was hard!

 

[Incorruptible]

Gosh! That was hard!

That wasn't trolling since it was me criticizing radical Islamists.

 

[brycejones]

That wasn't trolling since it was me being a bigoted tool.

FTFY

 

[Fern]

Yes, both parties do use lobbying firms. But it is hard to imagine any current Dem legislator who would align themselves with the idiotic legislation proposed by Mr. Burkman. GOP, not so much.
-snip-

I thought industries, companies and taxpayers employed lobbyists to take their case to Congresspersons.

You seem to be saying that Congresspersons employ lobbyists? I can't see why, Congresspersons already have access to one another.

-------------------------------

Some lobbyist writes a bill of his own accord and this is a story? He can no more introduce it than you or I.

Fern

 

[norseamd]

That wasn't trolling since it was me criticizing radical Islamists.

then you were trolling

 

[thraashman]

How am I a troll? Give me actual evidence.

This thread is evidence. People post factual evidence of several prominent Tea Party members pushing social issues. You claim they aren't Tea Party. People post more examples. You resort to calling them "lowlifes". You claim no one represents the Tea Party and then try to speak on behalf of the entire Tea Party by claiming they're not about social issues (which you can't claim because as you said no one speaks for them). You are challenged to find just ONE example of a Tea Party elected politician who doesn't focus on social issues, you make no attempts and resort to insults.

I literally don't think I can better define what it means to be a troll than just describe what you've done in this thread.

Speak all you want, but the evidence is that the Tea Party is the socially far right group more so than fiscally.

 

[Fern]

Originally Posted by Incorruptible
The Tea Party is about fiscal issues so when people talk about the social crap they're just fake.

But you can't back it up.....again repeating it over and over doesn't make it true.

Just have a look at wiki, it sums it up well enough:

The Tea Party does not have a single uniform agenda. The decentralized character of the Tea Party, with its lack of formal structure or hierarchy, allows each autonomous group to set its own priorities and goals. Goals may conflict, and priorities will often differ between groups. Many Tea Party organizers see this as a strength rather than a weakness, as decentralization has helped to immunize the Tea Party against co-opting by outside entities and corruption from within.

The Tea Party has generally sought to avoid placing too much emphasis on traditional conservative social issues.

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

The TEA Party is not a monolithic organization. It's name means "Taxed Enough Already".

It was formed out of concern for fiscal issues. Have others jumped onboard and do they have a social agenda? Yes, but when you're not an 'official' party there is nothing that can be done about it.

Fern

 

[BurnItDwn]

The holy rollers are holier than thou. They demand injustice for all (who are not like them!) This is to be expected from absent minded bigots.

 

[alzan]

I thought industries, companies and taxpayers employed lobbyists to take their case to Congresspersons.

You seem to be saying that Congresspersons employ lobbyists? I can't see why, Congresspersons already have access to one another.

-------------------------------

Some lobbyist writes a bill of his own accord and this is a story? He can no more introduce it than you or I.

Fern

Your right, I misspoke. Thanks.

The linked article in the OP states that Burkman and his lobbying firm have written up legislation and is looking for a sponsor/co-sponsors to advance the bill in Congress.

Congresspersons may have access to each other but considering how little has been done the last couple of Congressional sessions they sure don't act like they do.

 

[brycejones]

It was formed out of concern for fiscal issues. Have others jumped onboard and do they have a social agenda? Yes, but when you're not an 'official' party there is nothing that can be done about it.

Fern

I won't argue that its original genesis was more focused on fiscal issues. The point of debate with IC is his continued instance that anyone pitching a social issue can't be part of the Tea Party and isn't. Yet as you have so simply pointed out there isn't an "official" Tea Party therefore it isn't monolithic.

Come on the guy constantly refuses to support his statements and when asked to he goes straight to name calling and STFU comments.

 

[Zorba]

This is how 99.9% of all legislation is written. Just the way it is. Pretty much all staffers work on the hill for years and get sweet lobbying gigs after they get enough experience. No one is going to spend 20 years as a staffer making 45K a year.

I know, and I think that is a huge problem with the system. You have a lobbyist write the bills, and nobody reads past the executive summary, if they even get that far.

 

[Fern]

Let's make this easier then. Can you throw out the name of one Tea Party candidate who hasn't talked about social issues?

Guys, it's not that difficult.

There are no TEA Party candidates per se because the TEA Party is not an actual party.

Moreover, the TEA Party supports candidates that support their (simple) platform of fiscal conservatism. Congresspersons spend the majority of their time on issues other than fiscal matters. Typically, there is one appropriation bill per year (now we have CR's so there are votes every few months).

Because a candidate who espouses fiscal conservatism must also vote on many other things you're going to have a fairly wide range on issues for so-called TEA Party candidates. Some will be like Rand Paul, others like Cruz and other than fiscal issues I don't see how those two share much in common.

This is why the TEA Party will remain fairly popular: It has a limited platform that is popular. Heck, in '06 the Dems gained control of Congress with a large part of their platform being that of the TEA Party. Remember PAYGO? Remember Dems railing against the deficit? Remember Obama promising no more taxes (except for the rich)?

But that is also why the TEA Party will not become a real political party. You can't be a (basically) one issue party. There are too many other issues and as you define your stance on those you start losing people who support fiscal conservatism, no matter which stance you choose.

Fern

 

[brycejones]

Guys, it's not that difficult.

There are no TEA Party candidates per se because the TEA Party is not an actual party.

Moreover, the TEA Party supports candidates that support their (simple) platform of fiscal conservatism. Congresspersons spend the majority of their time on issues other than fiscal matters. Typically, there is one appropriation bill per year (now we have CR's so there are votes every few months).

Because a candidate who espouses fiscal conservatism must also vote on many other things you're going to have a fairly wide range on issues for so-called TEA Party candidates. Some will be like Rand Paul, others like Cruz and other than fiscal issues I don't see how those two share much in common.

This is why the TEA Party will remain fairly popular: It has a limited platform that is popular. Heck, in '06 the Dems gained control of Congress with a large part of platform being that of the TEA Party. Remember PAYGO? Remember Dems railing against the deficit? Remember Obama promising no more taxes (except for the rich)?

But that is also why the TEA Party will not become a real political party. You can't be a (basically) one issue party. There are too many other issues and as you define your stance on those you start losing people who support fiscal conservatism, no matter which stance you choose.

Fern

Unfortunately all to many of those politicians who align themselves with the Tea Party philosophy also take very conservative social position so frankly it is almost impossible to separate the two. I think there would generally be more support for the Tea Party if those aligned with it really did stick to fiscal issues, but they don't. My own state of Kansas and the dumbass shit we've put forward as legislation over the last several months is a perfect example.

 

[Fern]

I know, and I think that is a huge problem with the system. You have a lobbyist write the bills, and nobody reads past the executive summary, if they even get that far.

This is because government has made itself far too complicated.

They are basically a bunch of lawyers who know nothing of the industries they seek to regulate. Hence, they generally have people from the industry write the bills.

(That's not the case here.)

Fern

 

[Fern]

Unfortunately all to many of those politicians who align themselves with the Tea Party philosophy also take very conservative social position so frankly it is almost impossible to separate the two. I think there would generally be more support for the Tea Party if those aligned with it really did stick to fiscal issues, but they don't. My own state of Kansas and the dumbass shit we've put forward as legislation over the last several months is a perfect example.

Rand Paul is a very prominent TEA Party person, he doesn't, to my knowledge, support all the conservative social positions claimed by some to be TEA Party positions.

Politicians the TEA Party supports can NOT just stick to fiscal matters. What are they to do, be absent for 99% of the votes?

No, the TEA Party concept works perfectly fine for those who are only or primarily interested in fiscal issues. They are a 'one issue' advocacy group. They support politicians who support their one issue. They simply don't care, or cannot agree, about all the other issues so they don't concern themselves with it. IMO, if your #1, #2 and #3 political priorities are fiscal this is a very intelligent way to go about getting what you want. It gives you best chance for success.

Do other one issue advocacy groups spend their resources and capital on unrelated issues? Generally no. If your big issue is gay rights will you not support a gay rights candidate who is either fiscally liberal or conservative? No, they will support that candidate regardless. Likewise for the NRA and others.

Fern

 

[Fern]

Imagine your son being forced to shower with a gay man.

I know some of you think this is trite - hetero players showering with gay players. But it does get discussed among players even on TV.

First of all this whole thing is a stupid media creation. There have long been gay football players and players have long known who they were. For some reason the media likes to act like they have always either never been around or have been hiding and no one knew.

I saw an article last week where some other player was a bit incredulous at the news of Michael Sam being the first openly gay player. Well, a few years ago this guy publicly addressed his team and informed them he was gay.

Anyway, some players have mentioned a simple solution to whole shower thing: Just put stalls in the showers like there are in urinals. Cheap, fast, easy and simple.

Fern

 

[mchammer187]

Rand Paul is a very prominent TEA Party person, he doesn't, to my knowledge, support all the conservative social positions claimed by some to be TEA Party positions.

Politicians the TEA Party supports can NOT just stick to fiscal matters. What are they to do, be absent for 99% of the votes?

No, the TEA Party concept works perfectly fine for those who are only or primarily interested in fiscal issues. They are a 'one issue' advocacy group. They support politicians who support their one issue. They simply don't care, or cannot agree, about all the other issues so they don't concern themselves with it. IMO, if your #1, #2 and #3 political priorities are fiscal this is a very intelligent way to go about getting what you want. It gives you best chance for success.

Do other one issue advocacy groups spend their resources and capital on unrelated issues? Generally no. If your big issue is gay rights will you not support a gay rights candidate who is either fiscally liberal or conservative? No, they will support that candidate regardless. Likewise for the NRA and others.

Fern

Rand Paul
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/...marriage-conundrum-leads-to-marrying-animals/

This is perplexing but apparently the founder of the gay tea party group is against gay marriage
http://m.cnsnews.com/news/article/g...define-marriage-we-re-going-redefine-children

 

[thraashman]

Just have a look at wiki, it sums it up well enough:



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

The TEA Party is not a monolithic organization. It's name means "Taxed Enough Already".

It was formed out of concern for fiscal issues. Have others jumped onboard and do they have a social agenda? Yes, but when you're not an 'official' party there is nothing that can be done about it.

Fern

The Tea Party can claim they're all about fiscal issues all they want, but so long as they keep pushing these far right social candidates and trying to get them elected, then that claim has no merit. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it sure isn't a fucking deer just because you name it Bambi.

 

[michal1980]

The Tea Party can claim they're all about fiscal issues all they want, but so long as they keep pushing these far right social candidates and trying to get them elected, then that claim has no merit. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it sure isn't a fucking deer just because you name it Bambi.

Are you going to call out the islamists?

 

[michal1980]

How am I a troll? Give me actual evidence.

you don't tow the liberal line = trolling.