Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.
!JuMPb0dbaE (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#152,425
@152,417 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
She claims to be the tea party representative.
The tea party is a bunch of separate parties. Almost all are loons. The people they seem to love are the biggest hypocrites, though.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#152,428
@previous (!JuMPb0dbaE) > Almost all are loons.
I've asked you before to either explain this or desist. You refused. I ask you again.
> She claims to be the tea party representative.
Yes. She is like you; she SAYS to love freedom and tolerance, but what she has DONE and what she plans to DO prove the opposite.
> The people they seem to love are the biggest hypocrites, though.
completely meaningless statement
you sure are big on rhetoric and light on substance
!JuMPb0dbaE (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#152,431
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
You don't live in in the US, but you are on the Internet. You can find it out if you want.
The tea party is a loose collective of tons of local groups. It was originally intended to be a protest on the bailout. It spawned a movement, though, that is really just a bunch of angry ignorant people.
You are losing your grip on reality.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 21 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,434
@previous (!JuMPb0dbaE)
I ask you to either explain why you think people are "crazy" or to stop roandom slandering people. You respond with this: > You don't live in in the US, but you are on the Internet. You can find it out if you want.
Then you go on to accuse me "losing [my] grip on reality". This would be funny except YOU'RE ACTUALLY SERIOUS. YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE STUPID THINGS YOU SAY.
> The tea party is a loose collective of tons of local groups. It was originally intended to be a protest on the bailout. It spawned a movement, though, that is really just a bunch of angry ignorant people.
I see the Tea Party as people moving away from neoconservatism to libertarianism. I believe it's true origins would be the Tea Party money bomb organized by Ron Paul supporters.
> angry ignorant people.
Pot/Kettle
!JuMPb0dbaE (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,516
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
I'm not here to serve as your monkey. I am free to state my opinion as I see fit. It is not my fault that my opinion is considered fact among most academics, and among all legitimate academia.
The Tea Party movement was started after people lost all their 401k and shit. It may have co-opted the name from elsewhere, but it started out as protests against the stimulus. It quickly turned into these hate fests that prominent republicans would attend to try and win back public sentiment. People were really angry, and Republicans pounced on that shit. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are considered big Tea Party politicians (or what would you call Palin now?). Look at their records though. The libertarian slant is just fucking words they are repeating because it gives a sense of cohesion. They aren't really so much about that anymore.
Do you know about Glenn Beck's rally. It was all tea party people.
Here is some footage of tea parties marching on washington. http://youtu.be/lUPMjC9mq5Y Claim the interviews and such are hand picked, but you can't deny its all older white people.
Its people mad that a nigger is our President. Theres some others in there, but thats what its mostly is. Oh, and very conservative christians judging by the candidates the movement supposedly got elected.
They are all about "cutting spending" but what did the republicans almost cause a government furlough over? Fucking Planned Parenthood funding. They don't want to give them ANY funding just because they do abortions there. The abortions aren't covered by tax dollars at all. They don't care about the people. This is the fucking house where the tea party took control back from the democrats.
You are into Ron Paul, so I understand now where your idea of the Tea Party comes from. You sound crazy to anyone from the US who doesn't identify as part of the Tea Party movement.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,611
@previous (!JuMPb0dbaE)
No one ever agrees with MM, for good reason. He's not that hard to figure out, very distinct patterns, especially if you corner him on an issue.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,616
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
YOU DIDN’T CITE ANY SOURCES OR PROVIDE ANY LEGAL EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CLAIMS CASE DISMISSED
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,625
@previous (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
lolthis. Funniest part is, that he almost never has an example, much less sources, he just runs his mouth, says any retarded thing to disagree.
advi !!3gpAcg/hF joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 17 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,663
@152,417 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
Dude. I live in Bachmann's district and saw her in the local news all the time. She is BATSHIT RETARDED.
swamplights !!V3J448+/B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,853
@152,434 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
Why do you think that Jump has to listen to you?
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#152,857
@previous (swamplights !!V3J448+/B)
The real question is; why do any of us still respond to Mountaintard?
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 4 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,023
@152,663 (advi !!3gpAcg/hF)
I agree with you. She is a liar and a hypocrite.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,024
@152,853 (swamplights !!V3J448+/B)
He can either respond and defend his arguments or he can ignore me and lose credibility.
He needs to learn that slander is wrong.
swamplights !!V3J448+/B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,025
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
He could never gain credibility be responding to you.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 17 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,031
Are you on drugs when you write this? You lack basic reading comprehension. You ignore all questions asked of you. You answer questions that were never asked. You refute arguments that were never made.
> I'm not here to serve as your monkey.
WTF does that even mean? Is this because I asked you to explain why you called Bachmann "crazy"?
> I am free to state my opinion as I see fit.
Yes, I agree with this. It is not unreasonable to ask why you came to this opinion: yet when asked this, you flip out into an aspie rage.
> It is not my fault that my opinion is considered fact among most academics, and among all legitimate academia.
This is no longer an opinion, but a claim of fact. A false claim. I take it that are you not so stupid as to believe that "most academics" believe Bachmann is "crazy" and that you are lying here.
> The Tea Party movement was started after people lost all their 401k and shit. It may have co-opted the name from elsewhere, but it started out as protests against the stimulus. It quickly turned into these hate fests that prominent republicans would attend to try and win back public sentiment. People were really angry, and Republicans pounced on that shit. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are considered big Tea Party politicians (or what would you call Palin now?). Look at their records though. The libertarian slant is just fucking words they are repeating because it gives a sense of cohesion. They aren't really so much about that anymore.
The movements ideology and original impetus came from the Ron Paul Tea Party money bomb. It is a large group of people who don't necessarily agree with all aspects of each others political ideas. At the very least, they commonly support smaller government. Bachmann supports the PATRIOT Act and various overseas conflicts which are irreconcilable with the idea of small government.
> Do you know about Glenn Beck's rally. It was all tea party people. > Here is some footage of tea parties marching on washington. http://youtu.be/lUPMjC9mq5Y Claim the interviews and such are hand picked, but you can't deny its all older white people.
Cool. So what?
> Its people mad that a nigger is our President. Theres some others in there, but thats what its mostly is. Oh, and very conservative christians judging by the candidates the movement supposedly got elected.
LOL the race card. Cool. No one cares that a black man is president. The only people that mention race are Democrats. See you how you enable and sustain racism? Conservative Christians? Cool!
> They are all about "cutting spending" but what did the republicans almost cause a government furlough over? Fucking Planned Parenthood funding. They don't want to give them ANY funding just because they do abortions there. The abortions aren't covered by tax dollars at all. They don't care about the people. This is the fucking house where the tea party took control back from the democrats.
I take it your point here is that the government should take money from people and give it to other people to kill fetuses? Many people disagree with this. It is not right to take their money like this.
> You are into Ron Paul, so I understand now where your idea of the Tea Party comes from.
I am into Ron Paul, so I know a lot more than you about issues concerning Ron Paul.
> You sound crazy to anyone from the US who doesn't identify as part of the Tea Party movement.
I hope you're trolling. Please tell me: What do I do or say that you consider "crazy"?
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,033
> YOU DIDN’T CITE ANY SOURCES OR PROVIDE ANY LEGAL EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CLAIMS CASE DISMISSED
Strawman. Or you're possibly just retarded. I did not ask jump for sources or legal evidence. I asked him to explain why he called someone crazy.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos triple-posted this 15 years ago, 48 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,035
@153,025 (swamplights !!V3J448+/B)
Ad hominem. He is not responding to me; he is responding to my argument. An argument is not made less valid by who makes it.
swamplights !!V3J448+/B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,038
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
That depends on who you ask. You said that he would gain credibility be responding to you personally. That's not true.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,047
> > YOU DIDN’T CITE ANY SOURCES OR PROVIDE ANY LEGAL EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CLAIMS CASE DISMISSED > > Strawman. Or you're possibly just retarded. I did not ask jump for sources or legal evidence. I asked him to explain why he called someone crazy.
Reported for using "strawman". Mountaintard...
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,051
@153,038 (swamplights !!V3J448+/B) > >That depends on who you ask.
no, it doesn't. Logic is objective, not subjective.
> You said that he would gain credibility be responding to you personally. That's not true.
I was answering your question. I would not have framed the question so fallaciously.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,052
@153,047 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
You are a gentleman and a scholar.
!JuMPb0dbaE (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,066
@153,031 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
I told you. You don't know what you are talking about. The first protests that spawned the tea party movement were directly in response to the stimulus. Then it moved on to just being racist white people.
Ron Paul is a fringe candidate. He has no chance of winning the nomination. You dont live in the US. You don't actually get it. Bachmann has a better chance and only because the candidates like Romney don't see her as a serious threat.
Also, I gave evidence for Bachmann's craziness in the link.
Yes, I was on drugs when I wrote that earlier. I would be now if I didn't need to go to work.
Ron Paul is a loon who thinks the earth is 6000 years old and who wants to force raped women and girls who are the victims of incest to have the children of their rapists/molesters. He wants 14 year old girls raped by their father to have their father's baby. He is a monster. Just like you.
He thinks rapeists should be rewarded for their actions by not allowing the women to terminate their rape babies.
He also supports pseudoscience, but he is a libertarian when it comes to weed. Not women's reproductive rights.
Just like Bachmann. Claims less government but wants tons of restrictions for things she doesn't like. These people are fucking loons. Ron Paul is NOT a libertarian. He will admit that.
(Edited 47 seconds later.)
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,077
> just being racist white people.
When you lie like this your whole argument loses credibility.
> Ron Paul is a fringe candidate.
So? That doesn't make him right or wrong.
> He has no chance of winning the nomination.
So? That doesn't make him right or wrong.
> You dont live in the US. You don't actually get it. Bachmann has a better chance and only because the candidates like Romney don't see her as a serious threat.
So? That doesn't make her right or wrong.
> Also, I gave evidence for Bachmann's craziness in the link.
No, you gave evidence for the loss of standards in journalism. Why do YOU think she is crazy?
> Yes, I was on drugs when I wrote that earlier. I would be now if I didn't need to go to work.
Makes sense.
> Ron Paul is a loon who thinks the earth is 6000 years old and who wants to force raped women and girls who are the victims of incest to have the children of their rapists/molesters. He wants 14 year old girls raped by their father to have their father's baby. He is a monster. Just like you.
You are insane and a liar. Ron Paul wants to devolve health to the states, where it constitutionally belongs. Abortion is a health issue, and belongs to the states.
Do you always lie like this, or just when it suits you? I mean are you pathological or just immoral?
> He thinks rapeists should be rewarded for their actions by not allowing the women to terminate their rape babies.
as above. stop lying.
> He also supports pseudoscience, but he is a libertarian when it comes to weed. Not women's reproductive rights.
supports? howso? what pseudoscience?
> Just like Bachmann. Claims less government but wants tons of restrictions for things she doesn't like. These people are fucking loons. Ron Paul is NOT a libertarian. He will admit that.
Ron Paul is a libertarian, and he calls himself that.
!JuMPb0dbaE (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,081
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
Without Roe v Wade many women will be restricted from deciding their own reproductive choices by the Religious loonies.
Don't pretend it's anything else.
He is a loon. A libertarian doesn't pick an choose what liberties people have. He said in 2008 he wasn't a libertarian, but I guess he is embracing that more now.
Gotta lie when tue truth fails.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,087
protip !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,113
inb4 new IP
!JuMPb0dbaE (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 16 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^][v]#153,127
@153,098 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
There is an interview from 2008 where he answers a question about if he is a libertarian with something to the effext of I'm a republican. I'm registered as a republican.
I mean, he is running for the republican nomination. A lot of actual libertarians don't like Ron Paul. He isn't really a libertarian. He has a lot of libertarian views, but if he is calling himself a libertarian now, he is just grasping at straws to try and win.
Could be I'm confusing something his on said for him, I could just be placing in that video I saw. That is entirely possible, but he is a republican. I mean, you are aware that the Libertarian Party isn't the republican party?
Keep pretending to understand American politics. Most Americans dont. Especially supporters of Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is mostly supported by people who generally dont vote. They want to get involved in politics, but they are hipsters with little education or people who consider themselves "rebels." they hear "no taxes" and "legalize weed" and the common sense stuff, like Ron Paul's foreign Policy stance, which is pretty solid.
He is a fucking loon though. Keep it up, Internet warrior.
Move to the US, join the tea party and catholic church. You seem to want to so badly.
hamfist !!mtq555+/1 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 day later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#154,292
I FUCKING HATE ROLLING STONE
I read that article in the store yesterday and it always seems that at least one article has to be a politically-charged rant against the GOP when they're a fucking MUSIC MAGAZINE. The sad thing is a lot of people view Rolling Stone as the highest authority on music when they don't know shit. They rate movies harsher than music for fuck's sake