Newt loses it on FOXNEWS

[RV ME]

On 11/2/2016 at 7:28 AM, Shabibilicious said:

Not really any of my business personally, but was the above highlighted comment really necessary?  Why ya gotta be so mean, Hank?  

GO RV, then BV

Really Shabs?  All you have to do is look at the part of my quote that you didn’t highlight for the reason I said what you did highlight.  It should not be a surprise to anyone that if someone jabs me I will counter punch.  If that counter lands harder than expected too bad, it should have been expected.

On 11/2/2016 at 7:25 AM, bostonangler said:

Now that you're done insulting me, let me wrap up this "discussion".  I have friends just like you. Party first everything else follows. I have Republican and Democratic friends who would vote for their party if Hitler was on the ticket. I personally cannot understand the allegiance to one party. I tend to lean right but I do not swear by it.

To put it simply. If you are building a deck on the back of your house and you go to a lumber yard to buy wood and there are two or three stacks to choose from, would you pick all your planks out of one stack or would you choose the best planks from all stacks?

I'm sure you would pick the best boards you could find. That would make you a moderate. But when it comes to voting, it sounds as though you would only go with one stack and hope for the best. Being a moderate, I choose the best from each stack. That is how voters should look at elections. Every campaign platform is made up of planks. Each party has good and bad. This not only applies to the presidential election but also for local elections as well.

Think about it, you would build your deck with the best materials.

Sticking blindly to one party is simply being brainwashed. As Ron White would say, "you can't fix stupid"

One party does not have all the answers. Cooperation and yes even compromise are the keys to success in business, personal relationships and government.

JMHO

 

B/A

 

If wrapped up means that you are unable to intellectually respond to my calling out your previous BS then I agree.  If wrapped up means that I have to accept your latest response as the final word, then I do not.

In case you haven’t noticed, you are the only one talking “party” by saying you’re a Republican.  Not sure why you assign me to the “party first” crowd other than to attempt to show that you are better than me.  I am a conservative.  I have stated before that I am only registered a Republican in order to vote in the primary and because of the two parties they are the closest to being conservative.  You are obviously liberal.  Everything you have posted demonstrates that.  I know you say you lean right but please show me in any of your posts where there is evidence of that, I must have missed that one.  It seems to me that since you agree with no Republican platform or policies (except lower taxes), the only reason you vehemently demand to be called a Republican is so you can set yourself up as above the fray and better than everyone else because you vote against the party of your choice.  You repeatedly claim you want more people to go against what your party espouses, but you obviously do not mean it.  I say that because what you claim you want actually did happened recently, but apparently it didn’t suit your right leaning agenda.  I can think of no better example of Republicans going against the party elite than the TEA Party movement, a true grassroots movement that was against the big bank bailout.  Logic would dictate that since you are both a Republican who bucks your party hierarchy and you are against higher taxes, the Taxed Enough Already movement would have been exactly what you desired.  If you truly believe what you say and want more people to go against your party, why is it you denigrate the one movement that actually did?  Your comments regarding the TEA party demonstrates to me that you are disingenuous in what you claim you want.

I must point out that just because you search for non-warped wood does not make you a moderate. It makes you at best not completely stupid.  You set up a paradigm that you think makes you look moderate, but it fails on many levels, and I will explain.  So at one store there are two piles of wood, and since you search for the non-warped boards in both piles you seem to think that makes you a moderate, but it does no such thing.  That actually only means that you have discriminated (bad word to liberal) between good and bad lumber and has no bearing on your political or philosophical slant.  It is an obvious (and poor) attempt to demonstrate that only “moderates” look at both sides of an issue, which is a claim liberals often make.  I got news for you, conservatives also look at both sides of issues and discriminate between the good and the bad too.  How else would I be able to formulate and defend my position against another if I did not know both sides of the issue?  As for your lumber analogy, I would not dig through two stacks of wood looking for acceptable 2X4’s.  I would exercise an option your moderate mind apparently couldn’t conceive.  I would leave that crappy store and go to another that has quality lumber and not give the first store any of my money.

Love to hear you actually address the points I’ve made like I have done with yours, that would be an actual conversation.  But if not, I will consider this conversation wrapped up and I look forward to the next.  I will leave the direction of said conversation to you.  If you want to talk politics no problem.  If you want to spew BS I will call you on it.  Since we seem to have the same musical tastes maybe we should just keep it at that.  Either way, it’s your call.

  Good day.

[Shabibilicious]

5 minutes ago, RV ME said:

Really Shabs?  All you have to do is look at the part of my quote that you didn’t highlight for the reason I said what you did highlight.  It should not be a surprise to anyone that if someone jabs me I will counter punch.  If that counter lands harder than expected too bad, it should have been expected.

Trump 101.  

GO RV, then BV

[bostonangler]

3 minutes ago, RV ME said:

Really Shabs?  All you have to do is look at the part of my quote that you didn’t highlight for the reason I said what you did highlight.  It should not be a surprise to anyone that if someone jabs me I will counter punch.  If that counter lands harder than expected too bad, it should have been expected.

 

If wrapped up means that you are unable to intellectually respond to my calling out your previous BS then I agree.  If wrapped up means that I have to accept your latest response as the final word, then I do not.

 

In case you haven’t noticed, you are the only one talking “party” by saying you’re a Republican.  Not sure why you assign me to the “party first” crowd other than to attempt to show that you are better than me.  I am a conservative.  I have stated before that I am only registered a Republican in order to vote in the primary and because of the two parties they are the closest to being conservative.  You are obviously liberal.  Everything you have posted demonstrates that.  I know you say you lean right but please show me in any of your posts where there is evidence of that, I must have missed that one.  It seems to me that since you agree with no Republican platform or policies (except lower taxes), the only reason you vehemently demand to be called a Republican is so you can set yourself up as above the fray and better than everyone else because you vote against the party of your choice.  You repeatedly claim you want more people to go against what your party espouses, but you obviously do not mean it.  I say that because what you claim you want actually did happened recently, but apparently it didn’t suit your right leaning agenda.  I can think of no better example of Republicans going against the party elite than the TEA Party movement, a true grassroots movement that was against the big bank bailout.  Logic would dictate that since you are both a Republican who bucks your party hierarchy and you are against higher taxes, the Taxed Enough Already movement would have been exactly what you desired.  If you truly believe what you say and want more people to go against your party, why is it you denigrate the one movement that actually did?  Your comments regarding the TEA party demonstrates to me that you are disingenuous in what you claim you want.

 

I must point out that just because you search for non-warped wood does not make you a moderate. It makes you at best not completely stupid.  You set up a paradigm that you think makes you look moderate, but it fails on many levels, and I will explain.  So at one store there are two piles of wood, and since you search for the non-warped boards in both piles you seem to think that makes you a moderate, but it does no such thing.  That actually only means that you have discriminated (bad word to liberal) between good and bad lumber and has no bearing on your political or philosophical slant.  It is an obvious (and poor) attempt to demonstrate that only “moderates” look at both sides of an issue, which is a claim liberals often make.  I got news for you, conservatives also look at both sides of issues and discriminate between the good and the bad too.  How else would I be able to formulate and defend my position against another if I did not know both sides of the issue?  As for your lumber analogy, I would not dig through two stacks of wood looking for acceptable 2X4’s.  I would exercise an option your moderate mind apparently couldn’t conceive.  I would leave that crappy store and go to another that has quality lumber and not give the first store any of my money.

 

Love to hear you actually address the points I’ve made like I have done with yours, that would be an actual conversation.  But if not, I will consider this conversation wrapped up and I look forward to the next.  I will leave the direction of said conversation to you.  If you want to talk politics no problem.  If you want to spew BS I will call you on it.  Since we seem to have the same musical tastes maybe we should just keep it at that.  Either way, it’s your call.

 

  Good day.

The Tea Party was a good thing until it was taken over by “shysters and con men”.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/coulter-battles-hannity-over-tea-party-its-being-taken-over-by-shysters-and-con-men/

 

B/A