quote Robert D. Putnam, a professor of public policy at Harvard, and David E. Campbell, a political scientist at Notre Dame, say they have collected data indicating that the tea party is "less popular than much maligned groups like 'atheists' and 'Muslims." .........Survey’s surprising finding: tea party less popular than atheists and Muslims . .By Rachel Rose Hartman Political Reporter .PostsEmailRSS .By Rachel Rose Hartman | The Ticket – Wed, Aug 17, 2011....tweet360Share55EmailPrint..... Robert D. Putnam, a professor of public policy at Harvard, and David E. Campbell, a political scientist at Notre Dame, say they have collected data indicating that the tea party is "less popular than much maligned groups like 'atheists' and 'Muslims.'" But Campbell says the tea party was really an afterthought in their research. "We didn't go into this study to look at the tea party," Campbell said in an interview with The Ticket. The professors were following up on research they conducted in 2006 and 2007 for their book "American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us" and decided to add the tea party and atheists to their list of survey queries. By going back to many of the same respondents, the professors gleaned several interesting facts about the tea party. One of their more surprising findings, Campbell concedes, (and one drawing national attention) is that the tea party drew a lower approval rating than Muslims and atheists. That put the tea party below 23 other entries--including Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, Republicans and Democrats--that the professors included on their survey of "a representative sample of 3,000 Americans." By examining which respondents became supporters of the tea party, Campbell and Putnam's survey "casts doubt on the tea party's 'origin story,' " they write in the Times--though, in fairness, it's perhaps difficult to generalize on the movement's origins from a poll sample of 3,000 respondents. Early tea partiers were described as "nonpartisan political neophytes," Campbell and Putnam write, but their findings showed that tea partiers were "highly partisan Republicans" who were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. "They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do," they went on. In addition to being socially conservative, the study found a close tie between religion and the tea party, whose supporters seek out "deeply religious" elected officials "This helps to explain why candidates like Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry are just as much about the public presentation of themselves as religious people as fiscal conservatives," Campbell told The Ticket. Campbell said Tuesday that he does not regard his research as politically motivated. "I don't have a particular dog in this or any other political fight," he said. "We actually didn't go into this study primarily to look at the tea party," he told the Ticket. "The primary purpose of the study is to update what we learned about religion in America." ..

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs...eists-160220531.html

I, for one, have had quite enough of this nonsense.
Apparently I'm not the only one.

http://www.salon.com/news/p...arty_poll/index.html
------------------

Drive safely!

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 08-18-2011).]

I appreciate your posting this.

First of all, it IS interesting.

What is also "interesting" is the ANALYSIS of the survey, AND the reporting of it.


First of all, the tea party is "less popular THAN MUCH MALIGNED GROUPS like 'atheists' and 'Muslims'."


OK. That is a HUGE red flag. Who said ATHEISTS are much maligned? Actually, IN THE MEDIA, who are the people that are much maligned? Please name me a group more maligned by the media in the past 6 to 12 months than the tea party.

You CAN'T malign Muslims, because that is racist. No one maligns atheists because no one cares. Tea party? Vicious, lying, misrepresenting by the media AND liberal politicians on a consistent basis.

Boy, I WONDER why the tea party is less popular.


And I'm not even a tea party member nor follower. But this is just ridiculous to actually try to sit and figure out WHY they are less popular.


Listen to the analysis:

""They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do," they went on."


They had a low regard for immigrants. That is a bold faced lie. They likely have a low regard for CRIMINALS WHO ARE IN THE U.S. ILLEGALLY, AND BY THEIR PRESENCE ARE VIOLATING U.S. LAW. That means they have a HIGH regard for the constitution of the U.S. and the laws of the land, and a low regard for ANYone, whether from this country, or from another country, who violate the laws of this country.

They have a low regard for blacks. Now how in the world would this poll assess that??? Because they are against Barack Obama? That is SO shoddy, to destroy ANY credibility they might have.
They ought to be ashamed for putting out this kind of garbage, and it says more about the capability (pathetic) of academicians in colleges than it does about tea party people.

Hey, here's an idea. Why didn't they collect data on the popularity of college professors? "Yeah, we actually didn't go into this 'study' primarily to look at professors..."

Statistics is the oldest game of lying.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: I appreciate your posting this. First of all, it IS interesting. What is also "interesting" is the ANALYSIS of the survey, AND the reporting of it. First of all, the tea party is "less popular THAN MUCH MALIGNED GROUPS like 'atheists' and 'Muslims'." OK. That is a HUGE red flag. Who said ATHEISTS are much maligned? Actually, IN THE MEDIA, who are the people that are much maligned? Please name me a group more maligned by the media in the past 6 to 12 months than the tea party.

Glad you said it, so I don't have to say it...

x2

They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do," they went on."

I really find this interesting since the Tea Party movement did not begin until AFTER President Obama took office so how is it that the hated blacks long before Obama took office????

Talk about shoddy fact finding and loss of credibility. Thanks Neptune for pointing out that Liberal colleges support the Liberal agenda.

Shelby

This just in, NEPTUNE is as popular as a terd in a punch bowl. How can you possibly expect anyone to take you seriously.

Jim

[This message has been edited by jimbolaya (edited 08-18-2011).]

quote Originally posted by jimbolaya: This just in, NEPTUNE is as popular as a terd in a punch bowl. How can you possibly expect anyone to take you seriously. Jim

Damn, that would be nasty as hell. I would be so pissed if I saw a turd floating in the punchbowl at a party I went to...

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: I, for one, have had quite enough of this nonsense.

Heh, that's how the TEA party got started. You better gird your loins. More to come. We are just getting started on the "smart kids".

Dude, you said a couple of years ago the Tea Party was dead and no Republican would ever be elected again!
And now this CRAP!

quote Originally posted by jimbolaya: This just in, NEPTUNE is as popular as a terd in a punch bowl. How can you possibly expect anyone to take you seriously. Jim

I suspect he was posting it ironically, since he is smart enough to know the article and data behind it are laughably worthless and an obvious brick in the liberal wall of tea party character assassination so obviously he was posting this with tongue planted firmly in cheek.

Or not.

Keep dreaming, Neptune.

You only show up here to take a crap. What's wrong, do you lack indoor plumbing? No bathrooms at your wankette forum?

quote I, for one, have had quite enough of this nonsense.

Well, you better just learn to DEAL WITH IT, because we are here to stay. If that bugs you, GOOD.

[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 08-18-2011).]

I couldn't believe the title, so I had to take a look at the thread.

quote Originally posted by jimbolaya: This just in, NEPTUNE is as popular as a terd in a punch bowl.

A turd in a punchbowl would be an awesome party prank!

Neptune is beyond belief. I swear, any time I might be feeling discouraged about the Tea Party and grinding liberals into the dirt where they belong, Neptune shows up and gives me a good shot in the arm to make sure that liberals NEVER have power in this country again.

Not that I buy any of this, but:
What does all this say about those who were defeated by Tea Party candidates or candidates endorsed by the Tea Party?

Those losers, evidently must be about as popular as somewhere between dirt and the anti-christ.

But remember folks--the Tea Party is just some fringe lunatic movement, will never amount to anything and won't win a single seat in Congress. I know this, because I read it right here in OT in the run up before the mid term elections.

I just took a survey. The statistics are plain for all to see:

100% of the people polled consider Tea Party haters to be douche bags

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE:

quote Originally posted by Toddster: I just took a survey. The statistics are plain for all to see: 100% of the people polled consider Tea Party haters to be douche bags

Also, it seemed most of them were ugly, and had an excess of offensive body odor.

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: Also, it seemed most of them were ugly, and had an excess of offensive body odor.

The evidence is incontrovertable!

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: A turd in a punchbowl would be an awesome party prank!

Well NEPTUNE certainly is a joke.

Jim

Fear of the Tea Party is Palpable

You know the Tea Party is a political game-changer when the New York Times runs an Op-Ed by pointy-headed Ivy-League political scientists saying the country disapproves of the small-government grassroots movement.

“Given how much sway the Tea Party has among Republicans in Congress and those seeking the Republican presidential nomination, one might think the Tea Party is redefining mainstream American politics.

“But in fact the Tea Party is increasingly swimming against the tide of public opinion: among most Americans, even before the furor over the debt limit, its brand was becoming toxic …,” writes David Campbell (Notre Dame University) and Robert Putman (Harvard University).

Let’s, for the moment, accept the professor’s premise that the Tea Party agenda of fiscal sanity and binding power-mad government with the chains of the Constitution swims “against the tide of public opinion,” does that make them wrong?

After all, the president’s dismal approval ratings show that many of the same Americans who elected him in 2008 are suffering from “voter’s remorse.” Tea Partiers were loud and out front of these non-thinkers at the first anti-tax rallies held across the nation that same year. And while most Americans were uneasy with Obama’s nationalization of health care, it wasn’t until the Tea Party voiced its full-throated opposition to the ObamaCare abomination that the outrage of sleepy Americans grew and solidified.

The obvious reason for this is that GOP establishment leaders vacated the field of political battle, believing in nothing nobler than getting re-elected. These empty suits thought it better to help the president craft his oppressive policies than to oppose them. One notable Republican, Arlen Specter, even became an Obama Democrat.

But the Tea Party made a fateful decision that put it on a course to change the national conversation: they decided to challenge Specter-like Republicans in the GOP primaries of 2010.

The Democrats and their establishment GOP handmaidens did not know the extent of Tea Party power until they attempted to raise the nation’s debt ceiling as quietly as they had in years past. That didn’t happen. Thanks to the Tea Party, spending and debt took center stage, with the usual sleepy Americans horrified at the tortured bipartisan compromise that raised the debt by $2 trillion while leaving the crafting of meaningless budget cuts to a legislative commission. In the debt-ceiling debate aftermath, polls showed the nation’s anti-incumbent sentiment grew white hot.

That can only benefit the Tea Party.

“The Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials,” says Campbell and Putman, “In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today.”

And that’s the real story, and one that frightens both Democrats and their friends in the dominant Progressive mainstream media. Disaffected Tea Party conservative Republicans (and independents) are changing the face of the Republican Party that once played them like the proverbial fiddle; the men and women who campaigned as conservatives but legislated like their big-spending, big-government brothers across the aisle.

The Progressive media’s panic is palpable. They say that by pointing out the costly and unsustainable nature of America’s entitlement state the Tea Party is engaging in “terrorism.” That their vociferous defense of individual freedom against the coercive power of the Progressive state does not comport with their definition of “civility,” by which they mean silence and surrender.

The Campbell-Putman New York Times Op-Ed is an inept bit of Progressive propaganda. It’s doubtful their 3,000 person sampling is representative of the country at large. But their column, in my opinion, is meant to appeal to one specific constituency – the tired, timid and idealess compromisers leading today’s GOP. Progressives are desperate and hope the Republican Party’s usual suspects will rein-in their boisterous Tea Party members before they successfully upend Washington’s bankrupt Progressive Rube Goldberg machinery.

But there is a major flaw with this strategy: it assumes that many of these GOP dinosaurs will survive the weeding-out process to come this primary season. And with so many GOP dinosaurs heading toward extinction, the Times and Ivy-League professors will have only themselves to talk to.

It’s about to get a lot lonelier at the top of the ivory tower.

Well, many of the comments above seem to pretty much validate the findings reported in the article.
White men full of hate for those who are different than them, and who have a...slightly skewed view of the world.
Thanks, guys.

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 08-19-2011).]

Neptune you seem to be a Black gay guy, Kept by an older White gay guy you are so wierd ,you make me seem Liberal,But thier must be A fiero in the mix,so you may be save a bull.Your house has to be the Sufferdome!!.The democrats hate America & the tea party is dedicated to the Principals America is founded on,,So naturally the progressive liberal democrats like Moslem terrorist & child moslesters more Than they would the tea party ,,because the tea party Is 100% pro American..Ive spent some time in the Slamer & i know for a fact the harder the Criminal the more likely he is a democrat,,the higher up the perv sicko Deviant food chain the more likely he,s a democrat.


Democrats marxist like Moslem Terrs who hate America ,of course all Atheist and queers and other sicko diviants are ALWAYS democrats & HATE what America stands for.
...Obama,s soul bro,big time democrat Bill Ayres & his armpit hosebag Squeeze Bernadette Dorn is helping Hamas bomb, rocket .throat slit Israeli Babies,support boat flotillas
Democrats & moslems are the the new Nazi Party Planning another Haulazzacostalosers,, the alliance between the Democrats who hate america & the Moslems who hate Jews & Christians because the Koran tells them to,is a natural hate a thon.
Neptune I fought beside the Black man against the Marxist,american democrats,cubans & other commie riff raff..You want hate, slaves,racism,hate, move to Africa they still have slavery,Africa sucks,it is a flithy festering pig stye.full of abuse & back stabbing Blacks .please move there,, you will get your ignorant Racist eyes open..

[This message has been edited by uhlanstan (edited 08-19-2011).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Well, many of the comments above seem to pretty much validate the findings reported in the article. White men full of hate for those who are different than them, and who have a...slightly skewed view of the world. Thanks, guys.

Is this the equivalent of throwing rocks at a hornet's nest then claiming that all hornets are angry?

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: White men full of hate for those who are different than them, and who have a...slightly skewed view of the world.

White men ? Calling us racist quit working long ago, just like the boy who called wolf. I do have hate for those ... policies ... which are radically different than mine, and, skewed is in the eye of the beholder.

quote Originally posted by jimbolaya: This just in, NEPTUNE is as popular as a terd in a punch bowl. How can you possibly expect anyone to take you seriously. Jim

Thank god SOMEBODY is less popular than we atheists!
Way to fit right into that stereotypical suit, Jimbolaya.

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 08-19-2011).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Thank god SOMEBODY is less popular than we atheists! Way to fit right into that stereotypical suit, Jimbolaya.

The only one acting stereotypical is you. Typical liberal move, you accuse others of what you are guilty of. As usual you only show up to drop a terd, and then act surprised if anyone responds to your stupidity. You, at the very least, are a very old, and poor joke. The Tea Party movement is a grass roots movement based in what this country was founded. It disturbs you because it works, and I love to see you squirm.

Jim

[This message has been edited by jimbolaya (edited 08-19-2011).]

Frankly, I doubt it has less to do with being "unpopular" as is it about being afraid. I can easily see that the "tea party" is scaring the crap out of some people. They promote ending most or all entitlement programs, and people becoming self sufficient. I'm sure that does scare the hell out of many people, including a bunch of mainstream politicians. Apparently it scares the hell out of Neptune.

such sillyness

there is no such thing

its just republicans. thats it. well, maybe loud mouthed blowhards & self important - but - just republicans.....

who has voted for a candidate with a (T)? betcha not one of ya. there is no such thing.

[This message has been edited by Pyrthian (edited 08-19-2011).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Well, many of the comments above seem to pretty much validate the findings reported in the article. White men full of hate for those who are different than them, and who have a...slightly skewed view of the world. Thanks, guys.

So in a political thread, you get one negative post claiming you only show up to take a xxxx here.
Another possibly lumps you in the category of being a douche bag. And that possibly you were ugly and had body odor. But that was "tongue in cheek".
You get called a joke.


And from THAT, you declare that it is validation that they are white men FULL OF HATE.


You have a long history with some of the people that said that about you, got called a few names, that that is FULL OF HATE.


Do you really have any idea of how ridiculous that sounds?

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: Frankly, I doubt it has less to do with being "unpopular" as is it about being afraid. I can easily see that the "tea party" is scaring the crap out of some people. They promote ending most or all entitlement programs, and people becoming self sufficient. I'm sure that does scare the hell out of many people, including a bunch of mainstream politicians. Apparently it scares the hell out of Neptune.

I'm thinking you hit the nail on the head about "others" being afraid of the Tea Party because of the changes they propose to such things as entitlements. I doubt it scares Neptune though. Based on other posts he's made, he is most likely not receiving entitlement benefits. Owning at least two homes, one being a lake house doesn't normally get one into that entitlement income bracket. At least I hope it doesn't. Why he sees the world the way he does is beyond me but, eveyone has a right to an opinion, regardless of how skewed it may be.

OMG, I just had a thought, is Neptune going to run for office? Politicians who promise to give away money and benefits almost always get elected.

Edited for typos, sure hope I got'em all.
------------------
Ron

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 08-19-2011).]

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: Do you really have any idea of how ridiculous that sounds?

No, he doesn't. That's kinda the point, huh?

quote Originally posted by blackrams: <snip> Why he sees the world the way he does is beyond me but, eveyone has a right to an opinion, regardless of how skewed it may be. <snip>

Interesting you said that. I actually tried to discuss it with him in PM a while back- I even specified that I wasn't interested in arguing or trying to convert him, but that I wanted to try and understand where he was coming from (which is why I did it in PM) but he just ignored me. I was truly interested in his perspective, as I'm sure there is some sense to it somewhere. I took his silence to suggest that he wasn't really interested in exchanging ideas. I suspect he just likes the hostile exchanges in the public forum.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Fear of the Tea Party is Palpable You know the Tea Party is a political game-changer when the New York Times runs an Op-Ed by pointy-headed Ivy-League political scientists saying the country disapproves of the small-government grassroots movement. “Given how much sway the Tea Party has among Republicans in Congress and those seeking the Republican presidential nomination, one might think the Tea Party is redefining mainstream American politics. “But in fact the Tea Party is increasingly swimming against the tide of public opinion: among most Americans, even before the furor over the debt limit, its brand was becoming toxic …,” writes David Campbell (Notre Dame University) and Robert Putman (Harvard University). Let’s, for the moment, accept the professor’s premise that the Tea Party agenda of fiscal sanity and binding power-mad government with the chains of the Constitution swims “against the tide of public opinion,” does that make them wrong? After all, the president’s dismal approval ratings show that many of the same Americans who elected him in 2008 are suffering from “voter’s remorse.” Tea Partiers were loud and out front of these non-thinkers at the first anti-tax rallies held across the nation that same year. And while most Americans were uneasy with Obama’s nationalization of health care, it wasn’t until the Tea Party voiced its full-throated opposition to the ObamaCare abomination that the outrage of sleepy Americans grew and solidified. The obvious reason for this is that GOP establishment leaders vacated the field of political battle, believing in nothing nobler than getting re-elected. These empty suits thought it better to help the president craft his oppressive policies than to oppose them. One notable Republican, Arlen Specter, even became an Obama Democrat. But the Tea Party made a fateful decision that put it on a course to change the national conversation: they decided to challenge Specter-like Republicans in the GOP primaries of 2010. The Democrats and their establishment GOP handmaidens did not know the extent of Tea Party power until they attempted to raise the nation’s debt ceiling as quietly as they had in years past. That didn’t happen. Thanks to the Tea Party, spending and debt took center stage, with the usual sleepy Americans horrified at the tortured bipartisan compromise that raised the debt by $2 trillion while leaving the crafting of meaningless budget cuts to a legislative commission. In the debt-ceiling debate aftermath, polls showed the nation’s anti-incumbent sentiment grew white hot. That can only benefit the Tea Party. “The Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials,” says Campbell and Putman, “In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today.” And that’s the real story, and one that frightens both Democrats and their friends in the dominant Progressive mainstream media. Disaffected Tea Party conservative Republicans (and independents) are changing the face of the Republican Party that once played them like the proverbial fiddle; the men and women who campaigned as conservatives but legislated like their big-spending, big-government brothers across the aisle. The Progressive media’s panic is palpable. They say that by pointing out the costly and unsustainable nature of America’s entitlement state the Tea Party is engaging in “terrorism.” That their vociferous defense of individual freedom against the coercive power of the Progressive state does not comport with their definition of “civility,” by which they mean silence and surrender. The Campbell-Putman New York Times Op-Ed is an inept bit of Progressive propaganda. It’s doubtful their 3,000 person sampling is representative of the country at large. But their column, in my opinion, is meant to appeal to one specific constituency – the tired, timid and idealess compromisers leading today’s GOP. Progressives are desperate and hope the Republican Party’s usual suspects will rein-in their boisterous Tea Party members before they successfully upend Washington’s bankrupt Progressive Rube Goldberg machinery. But there is a major flaw with this strategy: it assumes that many of these GOP dinosaurs will survive the weeding-out process to come this primary season. And with so many GOP dinosaurs heading toward extinction, the Times and Ivy-League professors will have only themselves to talk to. It’s about to get a lot lonelier at the top of the ivory tower.

*Checks source of article* "Teapartytribune.com - sounds totally legit and non-biased!"

quote Originally posted by 8-P: *Checks source of article* "Teapartytribune.com - sounds totally legit and non-biased!"

I wasn't presenting it as anything other than biased, yes. It's counterpoint opinion.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: I wasn't presenting it as anything other than biased, yes. It's counterpoint opinion.

It's an article from the Tea Party supporters stating that the Tea Party is great, being presented against actual arguments from a legitimate journalist and a Harvard professor. It couldn't be less relevant or credible.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: such sillyness there is no such thing its just republicans. thats it. well, maybe loud mouthed blowhards & self important - but - just republicans..... who has voted for a candidate with a (T)? betcha not one of ya. there is no such thing.

One nice think about having no clue about the Tea Party is, in your mind you can make then out to be what ever you want!

I'm not real sure, but I think there's a lot of fragmentation within the tea party. I don't know if I even qualify as a tea party person as my impression of the tea party is that they're mostly your run of the mill conservatives, aside from their push for smaller government, lower taxes, and moving back to capitalism (as opposed to corporatism). They seem to hold firm to the same old conservative positions on social issues such as same sex marriage and abortion, which I disagree with strongly (I'm without exception a social liberal). I'm surprised that many TP people consider Ron Paul to be the "father" of the tea party given that while his personal opinions follow those lines, he firmly opposes the federal government mandating those things at all. And in fact wants marriage to be released entirely as a religious issue, not a government issue.

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: Interesting you said that. I actually tried to discuss it with him in PM a while back- I even specified that I wasn't interested in arguing or trying to convert him, but that I wanted to try and understand where he was coming from (which is why I did it in PM) but he just ignored me. I was truly interested in his perspective, as I'm sure there is some sense to it somewhere. I took his silence to suggest that he wasn't really interested in exchanging ideas. I suspect he just likes the hostile exchanges in the public forum.

Well, politically, if you dont subscribe to the majority opinion around here, hostile exchanges is usually all you get when you voice an alternate opinion... even in a humble way. I have experienced it, not nearly as much as Newf, Pyrthian or Neptune, but sometimes their opinions are wrote off Ron Paul style as crazy or dumb. But they are valid to the person who espouses them. Sometimes you stir the pot, like this article, because you know how bad some will behave.. it just proves your point.

Some not so much, but others believe they are here to tell you how wrong and invalid your opinion is based on their own opinions. In a hostile manner. I mean, calling someone "inneptune", and a host of other insults, you actually think he is gonna just sadle up and respond the way you want him to? He has, after all, been insulted so many times, why would he want to cooperate with anyone on "their side"..?

If you want facts why some people take on liberal attitudes, I suggest starting with what it means to be a conservative vs. a liberal.. I believe people slanted toward liberalism have their opinions mostly because of social injustice and want change. I believe (and rightly so) that conservatives are interested in the "way things were, and they were better.." Thats fine if you are born with a silver spoon, or luck out and get a good opportunity at education or jobs. Not saying that people dont also work for their opportunities, but the initial opportunity is just not there for so many, and those many are usually those born to poor families. So liberals probably believe more in social justice because they witnessed the lack of it growing up. This is not being a crybaby, this is noting that some have opportunities to get a running start based on their parents providence, but MANY do not.

After watching my mom and grandma die because of negligence combined with the unwillingness of insurance companies to help those who pay big money in premiums every year, you're damn right I voted for Obama and health care reform. And I dont believe it went FAR ENOUGH... mandatory insurance is something I could have done without.. but how many will now file bankruptcy on medical bills, and whats the cost difference to taxpayers in that regard? I dont know, who has those figures? What I DO know, is if I have a major issue my insurance cant or wont cover, I will be filing bankruptcy too.. and thats on the taxpayer dime. Dang, I wish I had a better way to do it, but premiums are so high, i just cant do it any other way.

I do not identify completely with either side, but I know where Neptune is coming from. The fact is, he linked a story he thought was valid, and received mostly insults from people who identify themselves at the other end of the political spectrum. If an opinion brings insults, why would I want to belong to such a caustic, insulting political group? HINT: Thats why I lean left-middle, because far right has usually been quite volatile with anyone who does not subscribe to their beliefs. Otherwise, why do we see talking heads like Anne Coulter writing books calling liberalism a disease? Why would I want to ally myself with someone who is of an opinion like THAT?

Thus, I'm an independent. I get my cake and eat it too, and I dont like many things about liberal OR conservative views. I think both, if taken pure, are horsepuckey. I vote for the candidate, not the party. I vote for the issue, not the party. But I tend to lean toward the left, because I grew up poor and saw many examples of many with no opportunities not based on what they did, but based on who they were born to.

Not a socialist, I am definitely a capitalist. I have been part of the workforce for 21 years, paid my own way through school by working midnights. After all that, I am still currently unemployed and applying at, no joke, McJobs. And I am getting too old for that nonsense. I knew some, from the other side of the tracks, who had the opportunity to be lawyers, doctors, politicians... just because they were born wealthy. Say what you may about it, but its quite a springboard that most dont get.

So anyone who does not agree - attack me, call me names as in the past, but thats my opinion and it wont be changed by yours. I believe many of the Tea Party candidates were elected because of anger, not qualifications. I dont particularly care for most, even if I do agree with the idea of fiscal responsibilty. Political warriors do not impress me here, they would more if they actually ran for office instead of parroting their favorite politician and touting opinion as fact.

Thats all I got, I'm going fishing.

quote Originally posted by 8-P: It's an article from the Tea Party supporters stating that the Tea Party is great, being presented against actual arguments from a legitimate journalist and a Harvard professor. It couldn't be less relevant or credible.

Well, everyone knows that if a Harvard professor says it, it MUST be true, huh? As far as someone being a "legitimate journalist", I don't think there are any of those around any more.