Tea Party Movement

[stdreb27]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/260#post_3312620
Nope, conflict of interest is conflict of interest. Let me put this another way so a conservative can understand. Lets say Streb27 runs for office on a platform of green energy and banning non-elelctric vehicles and also owns an electric car company. Make better sense now that I have converted it over to a conservative issue?
 
lol, this is the argument that the lib's use when they argue that oil people shouldn't be involved in Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement...
You're statement would be pulling someone over because he's speeding, while ignoring the woman getting killed on the corner...

I

 

[fishtaco]

Yeah, ask any of the people who died on the oil rig in the gulf how awesome it was to have big oil in bed with the people in charge of safety on the platforms. You don't have a problem with conflict of interest as long as it supports your own views and it helps your "team" win and if it takes an obvious conflict of interest to make it happen it is ok.
 
Fishtaco

 

[stdreb27]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312666
Yeah, ask any of the people who died on the oil rig in the gulf how awesome it was to have big oil in bed with the people in charge of safety on the platforms. You don't have a problem with conflict of interest as long as it supports your own views and it helps your "team" win and if it takes an obvious conflict of interest to make it happen it is ok.
 
Fishtaco
Right because people who've never stepped on a rig know what is safe and what isn't.

 

[darthtang aw]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312666
Yeah, ask any of the people who died on the oil rig in the gulf how awesome it was to have big oil in bed with the people in charge of safety on the platforms. You don't have a problem with conflict of interest as long as it supports your own views and it helps your "team" win and if it takes an obvious conflict of interest to make it happen it is ok.
 
Fishtaco
Let me try something.
 
 
I own a retail pet business. I also own dogs. There are three dog food brands I carry. I believe in their nutritional value completely. I even feed them to my own dogs. I have study pet nutrition for years (had to for my field). I meet people all the time at dog parks, and other public places and usually end up talking dog topics and food is always one.
 
Now say 10 years from now I was elected and in office. lets say congress wanted to regulate dog food a bit better and was writting a bill concerning ingredients, processing, shipping, and packaging. I write the bill in a manner to conform with who the three brands I have always supported and believed in operate.
 
 
Now are my previous beliefs in what I feel is right a conflict of interest in this situation?

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/260#post_3312590
Here is another example of how great this new conservatism is that you guys are all cheerleaders for. We have a long-time congressman here is Oregon that is a dem and very liberal. He has managed to stay out of any trouble and has not been caught with his hand in the cookie jar yet. Regardless he has been in office way too long and needs to go, the GOP challenger is spouting as part of his platform that the public school system needs to go, yeah great, go Tea Party. The only problem is guess what the company he owns does? It sells home-school materials. So I have the choice between a decent lib who I don't agree with on some of his platforms or a crooked from the start GOP person who I agree on very little with. Guess which way I will vote on that.
 
Fishtaco
 
Who are you referring to?
 

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/260#post_3312620
Nope, conflict of interest is conflict of interest. Let me put this another way so a conservative can understand. Lets say Streb27 runs for office on a platform of green energy and banning non-elelctric vehicles and also owns an electric car company. Make better sense now that I have converted it over to a conservative issue?
 
Nancy Pelosi banned offshore drilling and pushed through credits for alternative energy powered vehicles why owning a large block of stock in Clean Fuels Technology, a company that converts fleet vehicles to run on natural gas. Do you mean that kind on conflict of interest.
 
By the way, Jim Huffman is the GOP senate candidate and I couldn't find anything where he suggested abolishing government schools and is occupation is listed as a law professor at a university. Are we talking about the same guy?
 

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312666
Yeah, ask any of the people who died on the oil rig in the gulf how awesome it was to have big oil in bed with the people in charge of safety on the platforms. You don't have a problem with conflict of interest as long as it supports your own views and it helps your "team" win and if it takes an obvious conflict of interest to make it happen it is ok.
 
Fishtaco
Would you feel better having someone who doesn't know their ear from their elbow about the industry they're in charge of regulating? Bad example anyway because it is still not known exactly what led to the failure.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/260#post_3312625
 
You have clearly stated any laws or legislature created due to religion are bad ideas.
 
The reason the Europeans abolished slavery? The Catholic Church pushed for it.
 
The Reason The North wanted to end Slavery/ The Quakers and Northern Baptists Pushed for this, since slavery goes against the Teachings of jesus.
 
Abraham Lincoln in many speeches during the civil war stated that "God has brought upon us this war as punishment for slavery".
 
 
 
 
 
 
So based on YOUR VIEWS AND STATEMENTS abolishing slavery due to religious beliefs was a bad thing and do not support it.
 
Is this a "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" type of answer?
 
Look, I understand relgion is embedded into our laws. Why wouldn't it? Since the dawn of this country, the people that started it were very religious. I doubt there were a handful of people back in the 1700's that would've been considered Atheist or Agnostic. You would have been ostracized by your community if you weren't in church every Sunday. Having laws based on the Ten Commandments is not a bad idea. They've always been tied to the main tenets of any society. Some are not considered as severe, depending on the geographic location - "Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's wife" - pretty common occurrance in the U.S. Do that in Turkey , Iraq, or Iran, you get your head cut off, or get buried to your head and stoned to death.
 
You don't seem to have a problem with ANY kind of law being created based strictly on someone's religious beliefs. I'll turn it around. A massive group of Atheist get voted into Congress, and pass a bill removing the words "In God We Trust" off of all US Currency. The same group also changes the phrase "One Nation Under God" to "One Nation Under Old Glory". Would you have a problem with that?

 

[darthtang aw]

Would I like this? Not really, but would it cause me grief? no. Would I say they do not have the right to make these laws based off their beliefs? No. Every law, every edict, is created off of a belief structure...Be it god, mother nature, zues, satan, scientology, aliens, science itself, and a slew of others. but the bottomline is they are beliefs...which is where laws come from.
 
So if you disregard someones belief because they are rooted in religion...this is no different than disregarding someone elses belief because they are rooted in science or astronomy. All political opinions are formed off a belief structure...some call it god. But it is no less valid than science. scientific ideas and beliefs change as time goes on. example...global cooling, to global warming, to climate change. 40 years ago...science was positive it was global cooling.
 
The bottomline...people hold these beliefs because they are in their heart to begin with and fall in line with their moral values....some people just give a name to this feeling and call it god.
 
This may not be believable to you, but it is the truth. i am not very religious. I hold my beliefs, but do not go to church. I read the bible yes. I also read a lot of other religious holy books and articles on religion in general.
 
 
 
 
As long as this is what the constituents in a majority want, I have no issue with a change such as this. Now if this was passed against the will of the people I might take bigger issue with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312786
Is this a "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" type of answer?
 
Look, I understand relgion is embedded into our laws. Why wouldn't it? Since the dawn of this country, the people that started it were very religious. I doubt there were a handful of people back in the 1700's that would've been considered Atheist or Agnostic. You would have been ostracized by your community if you weren't in church every Sunday. Having laws based on the Ten Commandments is not a bad idea. They've always been tied to the main tenets of any society. Some are not considered as severe, depending on the geographic location - "Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's wife" - pretty common occurrance in the U.S. Do that in Turkey , Iraq, or Iran, you get your head cut off, or get buried to your head and stoned to death.
 
You don't seem to have a problem with ANY kind of law being created based strictly on someone's religious beliefs. I'll turn it around. A massive group of Atheist get voted into Congress, and pass a bill removing the words "In God We Trust" off of all US Currency. The same group also changes the phrase "One Nation Under God" to "One Nation Under Old Glory". Would you have a problem with that?
 
 

 

[darthtang aw]

Oh, and maybe if we did stone or punish adultery we might have a lot less problems in our family units today and the country.

 

[stdreb27]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312750
Nancy Pelosi banned offshore drilling and pushed through credits for alternative energy powered vehicles why owning a large block of stock in Clean Fuels Technology, a company that converts fleet vehicles to run on natural gas. Do you mean that kind on conflict of interest.
 
By the way, Jim Huffman is the GOP senate candidate and I couldn't find anything where he suggested abolishing government schools and is occupation is listed as a law professor at a university. Are we talking about the same guy?
 
Come on now, surely by now you've figured out Fishtaco is pretty salacious when describing any conservative... For someone who claims to be an independent, he sure talks about conservatives a lot like all the kook left wing bloggers...
 

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312844
Come on now, surely by now you've figured out Fishtaco is pretty salacious when describing any conservative... For someone who claims to be an independent, he sure talks about conservatives a lot like all the kook left wing bloggers...
 
I'm still waiting to hear about this crazy Tea Party GOP Oregon candidate. I couldn't find anything on it in about 10 minutes of searching.
 

 

[fishtaco]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312903
I'm still waiting to hear about this crazy Tea Party GOP Oregon candidate. I couldn't find anything on it in about 10 minutes of searching.
 
I heard it yesterday while it was being discussed on a local radio station, today they talked about our former Dem govenor who is running again, turns out he likes to get those special home loans that only politicians seem to be able to get and I doubt you will find that either. I will keep an eye out for something that I can link. As far as Pelosi having a conflict of interest, the same rules apply to her as any other dirtbag politician.
 
Sorry to keep you waiting, but the sun was out and my sports car is running perfect and I do have my priorities.
 
Fishtaco
 

 

[fishtaco]

Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312844
Come on now, surely by now you've figured out Fishtaco is pretty salacious when describing any conservative... For someone who claims to be an independent, he sure talks about conservatives a lot like all the kook left wing bloggers...
 
I'm only salacious because you can't seem to understand how flawed BOTH political parties are, There are few if any heroes on either side and it seems more like you are just rooting for your favorite pro-wrestler than anything else.
 
I'm so out of here for the weekend, I've got my little patch of heavened mowed down and looking like a golf course and it is time to play some bocci and drink some beer.
 
Fishtaco

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312907
I heard it yesterday while it was being discussed on a local radio station, today they talked about our former Dem govenor who is running again, turns out he likes to get those special home loans that only politicians seem to be able to get and I doubt you will find that either. I will keep an eye out for something that I can link. As far as Pelosi having a conflict of interest, the same rules apply to her as any other dirtbag politician.
 
Sorry to keep you waiting, but the sun was out and my sports car is running perfect and I do have my priorities.
 
Fishtaco
 
Local radio is about as reliable as internet bloggers when it comes to facts.

 

[bionicarm]

Texas strikes again:
 
Publishers were put on notice Friday when a divided State Board of Education vowed to reject textbooks with a pro-Islamic and anti-Christian slant, sending a message that critics say promotes fear and prejudice. The resolution, approved by a 7-6 vote, says multiple world history textbooks are tainted with views that demonize Christianity and favor Islam. The move essentially delivers a warning to textbook publishers from one of their largest markets, but it can't force their hand. Texas schoolchildren wouldn't see changes in their history books, if any are made, until the board adopts new ones. Adoption is slated for 2012 but likely will be delayed because of budget constraints.
 
 
This of course was voted along party lines, with the Ultra Conservative Republicans with the majority. This is the same bumch of nutjobs that last year were arguing about how to address evolution in the science textbooks.

 

[darthtang aw]

So you have no problem with educational materials in school supporting one religion and not another?

 

[reefraff]

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3312958
Texas strikes again:
 
Publishers were put on notice Friday when a divided State Board of Education vowed to reject textbooks with a pro-Islamic and anti-Christian slant, sending a message that critics say promotes fear and prejudice. The resolution, approved by a 7-6 vote, says multiple world history textbooks are tainted with views that demonize Christianity and favor Islam. The move essentially delivers a warning to textbook publishers from one of their largest markets, but it can't force their hand. Texas schoolchildren wouldn't see changes in their history books, if any are made, until the board adopts new ones. Adoption is slated for 2012 but likely will be delayed because of budget constraints.
 
 
This of course was voted along party lines, with the Ultra Conservative Republicans with the majority. This is the same bumch of nutjobs that last year were arguing about how to address evolution in the science textbooks.
Pretty sad. It should have been a unanimous vote. I saw some of the example of their complaints.
 
Do you think it's proper to discuss the Christian crusades and their use of military force to oust Muslims but not ever mention that the Muslims had used Military force to take the lands in the first place?

 

[stdreb27]

Where is bionic and fishtaco to go after Obama? Of course they don't, or just refuse to look at it...
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/obama-talks-about-his-faith-2/?hp
ALBUQUERQUE — President Obama expounded Tuesday on the reasons he became a Christian as an adult, telling a group of residents here that he was a “Christian by choice” and that “the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead –

[hr]
> being my brother and sister’s keeper.” <

[hr]
Oh look he's using christianity to justify his social services again.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/280#post_3313962
Where is bionic and fishtaco to go after Obama? Of course they don't, or just refuse to look at it...
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/obama-talks-about-his-faith-2/?hp
ALBUQUERQUE — President Obama expounded Tuesday on the reasons he became a Christian as an adult, telling a group of residents here that he was a “Christian by choice” and that “the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead –

[hr]
> being my brother and sister’s keeper.” <

[hr]
Oh look he's using christianity to justify his social services again.
I'm curious as to why a person's religious preference should even be an issue when holding a political office. The only reason Obama even talks about Christianity is because 1 in 6 Americans thinks he's a Muslim (thanks to idiots like Limbaugh and Beck). Obama has made it quite apparent he's not the devout religious type. He doesn't put up this fascade by attending church every Sunday to make it appear he's highly religious. I've always shook my head with these politicians who make these 'photo ops' of walking out of a church every Sunday morning with spouse and kids in tow. Most of them probably couldn't even tell you what the priest or pastor said in their sermon, and could probably care less. Just as long as they put in that appearance to show the the other bible thumpers who represent the majority vote in this country that they believe in The Almighty and 'Have Religion'. So I guess you can't hold a political office in this country if you're an Atheist or Agnostic? Where exactly is that stated in the Constitution?