PDA

View Full Version : Left is turning to Fear to Combat Rising Tea Party Tide



Parker2112
11-03-2010, 01:24 PM
Be afraid of Rand Paul, people...he is an Anarchist! :wow

The Left is the Right is the Left.

UyCBUBPcalw

clambake
11-03-2010, 01:25 PM
15 minutes?

you gotta be kidding.

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 01:31 PM
@ 7:16, the fear begins.

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 01:32 PM
@ 8:10 it gets waist deep. It lasts from that point till the end.

ChumpDumper
11-03-2010, 01:44 PM
Not going to watch it.

Summarize if you want.

MannyIsGod
11-03-2010, 01:49 PM
If they called Rand paul the antichrist they're pretty LOLable.

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 01:56 PM
If they called Rand paul the antichrist they're pretty LOLable.

not antichrist. anarchist.

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 01:56 PM
Not going to watch it.

Summarize if you want.

left is the right is the left. is the right again.

ChumpDumper
11-03-2010, 01:57 PM
left is the right is the left. is the right again.Based on what in that interview?

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 02:01 PM
Left says "Doomsday!"

This guy says maybe or maybe not.



The question remains is whether Rand Paul is posturing as so many elected officials do before voting on the debt ceiling issue.
Of all the six or more new Republican senators, Paul is the least likely to waiver between politics and principle.
By failing to increase the debt ceiling, the government will no longer be able to borrow and pay its bills and risk its credit rating to drop to unaffordable interest rates.
This may or may not be a doomsday scenario, but it is not an exhilarating example of democracy in action when one man elected by 100,000 or so people in a small state affecting the lives of 330 million Americans if not the major industrial nations in the world.

http://themoderatevoice.com/91010/rand-pauls-road-to-fiscal-sanity-or-global-chaos/

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 02:02 PM
Based on what in that interview?

Based on the use of fear mongoring to control popular opinion. The same tactic that the left so hated during the Bush years.

Its not an interview. Its Rands victory speech... followed by the sky is falling. Rand Paul is going to push the world into a Mayan doomsday scenario.

clambake
11-03-2010, 02:05 PM
well....he is an eye doctor....so i guess his vision is clear.

MannyIsGod
11-03-2010, 02:10 PM
:lmao my bad I read antichrist.

Parker2112
11-03-2010, 02:18 PM
:lmao my bad I read antichrist.

Im sure thats what Olberman was thinking, lol

DarrinS
11-03-2010, 08:47 PM
An article about their embarassing coverage last night

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/zontv/2010/11/msnbc_odonnell_election_night.html




MSNBC: Embracing the fear factor on election night

If you look at no other cable TV coverage of election night, you need to see this from MSNBC. It is the reaction of a the panel that spent the night at a desk analyzing the results for viewers.

Some might call it an anchor desk, but I would not debase the word "anchor" by putting it in front of a desk that includes folks offering this kind of analysis. The team includes: Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Lawrence O'Donnell and Eugene Robinson.

This is their reaction Tuesday night to the victory speech of Rand Paul, the new U.S. senator from Kentucky. Check out O'Donnell's words, in particular, against MSNBC's claim that Fox News, not MSNBC, is the cable channel trafficking in fear. O'Donnell says Rand is now "empowered" to "creat a worldwide despression."

Talk about the apocalypse on election night brought to you by your friendly cable TV analyst. I'm not kidding, check it out. (If you don't want to hear Paul's speech, move the button ahead and start the video at the 8 minute mark. O'Donnell is in full flower by the 9 minute mark. I promise you will stay to the end to hear all the madness from MSNBC's panel of "expert" analysts.)

I really would like to hear the folks who tell me MSNBC is a real news channel explain this kind of analysis. I can see Jon Stewart's speech has really made a difference at MSNBC.

BlairForceDejuan
11-04-2010, 09:41 AM
I watched MSNBC most of the night. Matthews was so pissy :lmao I went to bed at 2 and woke up at 7 the next morning and he was still on and even more pissier.

RandomGuy
11-04-2010, 11:37 AM
not antichrist. anarchist.

The Libertarian platform is much more anarchistic than most Libertarians admit to.

fraga
11-04-2010, 11:45 AM
Oh so you mean the Left is finally taking a page from the playbook of the Right...

Wild Cobra
11-04-2010, 08:31 PM
The Libertarian platform is much more anarchistic than most Libertarians admit to.
Very true. There must be some regulation to keep away from anarchy.

Parker2112
11-04-2010, 09:12 PM
The Libertarian platform is much more anarchistic than most Libertarians admit to.

This is false. As stated by someone who has no knowledge ow the party.

Libertarians believe we should take all the power that we clutch in our federal security blanket, and leave it to states and local governments.

Positives:
-local gov is better suited to be a problem solver for local issues
-local gov is composed of locals, and is thus better in tune with locals
-local gov is composed of locals, who can be reigned in by local citizens.
-this arrangement avoids having laws imposed on citizens by strangers whose office is thousands of miles away, and who are subject to constant national/ international interests/pressures.

It would result in more gridlock amongst the states, but it would not result in "anarchy."

And the fed govt would be relegated to its originally intended purposes.

Parker2112
11-04-2010, 09:13 PM
Very true. There must be some regulation to keep away from anarchy.

it would exist. at the state level.

Wild Cobra
11-04-2010, 09:15 PM
This is false. As stated by someone who has no knowledge ow the party.

Libertarians believe we should take all the power that we clutch in our federal security blanket, and leave it to states and local governments.

Positives:
-local gov is better suited to be a problem solver for local issues
-local gov is composed of locals, and is thus better in tune with locals
-local gov is composed of locals, who can be reigned in by local citizens.
-this arrangement avoids having laws imposed on citizens by strangers whose office is thousands of miles away, and who are subject to constant national/ international interests/pressures.

It would result in more gridlock amongst the states, but it would not result in "anarchy."

And the fed govt would be relegated to its originally intended purposes.
Parker, some of the platform ideas the Libertarian Party has, would be anarchistic. Read them carefully and consider the ramifications:

Libertarian Party Platform (http://www.lp.org/platform)

Wild Cobra
11-04-2010, 09:31 PM
I'll take that back. The platform for 2010 has apparently been reworded, and doesn't carry that flaw any longer.

Parker2112
11-04-2010, 10:22 PM
I'll take that back. The platform for 2010 has apparently been reworded, and doesn't carry that flaw any longer.

Well, awright!

ElNono
11-04-2010, 11:35 PM
I'll take that back. The platform for 2010 has apparently been reworded, and doesn't carry that flaw any longer.

It's very convenient to be able to reword the document containing your core values as time goes by. I'm sure any similarity with moving goalposts is merely coincidental.

Parker2112
11-04-2010, 11:53 PM
It's very convenient to be able to reword the document containing your core values as time goes by. I'm sure any similarity with moving goalposts is merely coincidental.

Keep in mind that WC may be misremembering the language he dreamed about in the first place:downspin:

ElNono
11-05-2010, 12:07 AM
Keep in mind that WC may be misremembering the language he dreamed about in the first place:downspin:

No, he couldn't possibly be wrong. :dramaquee

:lol

possessed
11-05-2010, 12:49 PM
I watched MSNBC most of the night. Matthews was so pissy :lmao I went to bed at 2 and woke up at 7 the next morning and he was still on and even more pissier.

That tingly feeling running up his inner-thigh must have gone away.

Duff McCartney
11-05-2010, 01:07 PM
I'm no supporter of MSNBC but I think Rand Paul is a kook.


On June 14, 2010 the Louisville Courier-Journal reported that Paul, who described himself as a "board-certified" ophthalmologist, was not certified by the American Board of Ophthalmology.From 1995 through 2005 Paul had an AMA-recognized certification until it lapsed.Paul is currently certified by the National Board of Ophthalmology, a rival organization founded by Paul himself in 1999 with Paul as president and his wife as vice-president.Paul has said the group has since recertified several hundred ophthalmologists. The National Board of Ophthalmology's mailing address is a UPS Store in Bowling Green, Kentucky; the organization lacks a website and is not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS).

And I can't fathom somebody who wants to change the constitution. But there are a lot of conservatives that would change the Constitution if they could.