Bets on federal shutdown?

POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Thursday, February 19, 2026 15:16
VIEWED: 4531
PAGE 3 of 5

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Well, if that soldier gets killed, he DEFINITELY doesn't get paid!


But that's because conservatives hate the troops.

---

Not really. It is because the liberals and neo-cons have spent the troops money...and the troops children's money....and the troops grandkids money...and they spent it all on free abortions for poor slutty people and bombs.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
It's funny that some consider "Support the Troops" to only mean sending them off to die.

---

I'm more of the "Support the troops. Bring them home." variety. The only way to support them is to value their lives and not send them off on security missions for corporations that own our govt.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
It's funny that some consider "Support the Troops" to only mean sending them off to die.

---

I'm more of the "Support the troops. Bring them home." variety. The only way to support them is to value their lives and not send them off on security missions for corporations that own our govt.

---

See, you are whimmmmmppy. Read and comment on my post three up.....Really? You know I'm right...call Kwicko on his parENTenSHIp....Or get out of the way....Why us libertard's fail....

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaneman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
It's funny that some consider "Support the Troops" to only mean sending them off to die.

---

I'm more of the "Support the troops. Bring them home." variety. The only way to support them is to value their lives and not send them off on security missions for corporations that own our govt.

---

See, you are whimmmmmppy. Read and comment on my post three up.....Really? You know I'm right...call Kwicko on his parENTenSHIp....Or get out of the way....Why us libertard's fail....

---

Wow. One or two of those words were actually WORDS!


Meth is a dangerous drug.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaneman:
See, you are whimmmmmppy.

---

Ron Paul agrees with me. He has been unequivocally against the War on Terror, Iraq, and Afghanistan from the get go.

Is he a "whimpy" libertard too?

This is why I cannot stand the Tea Party. They say they are "libertarian," but then want the biggest government they can buy to bomb brown people.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
This is why I cannot stand the Tea Party. They say they are "libertarian," but then want the biggest government they can buy to bomb brown people.

---

Is the Tea Party bombing brown people in Libya? No, Obama is.

Is the Tea Party bombing brown people in Afghanistan? No, Obama is.

Is the Tea Party bombing brown people in Pakistan? No, Obama is.


The Tea Party wants limited government and less national debt. They are trying to do that now in Congress. I have never heard any Tea Partyer call for a bigger governement. You have? Cite it please. I have never heard the Tea Party advocate for bombing brown people. You have? Cite it please.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Quote:

---

CTS: They say they are "libertarian," but then want the biggest government they can buy to bomb brown people.

---

Is the Tea Party bombing brown people in Libya? No, Obama is.
Is the Tea Party bombing brown people in Afghanistan? No, Obama is.
Is the Tea Party bombing brown people in Pakistan? No, Obama is.

---

Uh, cause the TP isn't in charge and doesn't have the authority to bomb brown people in Libya, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Obama is in charge, so yeah, he's doing it and not them. Other than needling Obama whenever they can, they're not protesting though, see?

Notice I said they WANT to bomb brown people. In other words, they WANT a bigger military and they WANT that military to engage in countries filled with brown people.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
I have never heard any Tea Partyer call for a bigger governement. You have? Cite it please.

---

1. Stronger Military

http://www.teaparty.org/about.php#what

These are listed under their non-negotiable core beliefs.

"Stronger Military Is Essential.
Government Must Be Downsized."

How do you get a stronger military except with bigger government (bigger govt/Pentagon budget, more laws and benefits favorable to the military, more power for the military)?

2. Voting records.

Look below for a sample of the voting records of TP'iers (TP Caucus). You'll find they want smaller govt in some areas, but BIGGER, more intrusive govt in others, and it is not just the military. Most of them support the Patriot Act, abortion restrictions, immigration enforcement, War on Drugs, banning same-sex marriage, etc.

For all TP politicians, see here.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/List_of_Tea_Party_polit
icians

Then go here and look up their voting records.
http://www.ontheissues.org/House.htm

There are 14 members of the TP Caucus. I am posting only half of them just so you can see the pattern.

Quote:

---

Robert Aderholt

http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Robert_Aderholt.htm

* Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
* Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
* Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)
* Voted NO on disallowing the invasion of Kosovo. (May 1999)
* Solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism. (Apr 2002)
* Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition. (Apr 2008)
* Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program. (Apr 2009)

---

Quote:

---

Joe Wilson

http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Joe_Wilson.htm

* Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
* Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
* Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)
* Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition. (Apr 2008)
* Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program. (Apr 2009)

---

Quote:

---

Louie Gohmert

http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Louie_Gohmert.htm

* Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
* Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
* Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
* Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition. (Apr 2008)
* Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program. (Apr 2009)

---

Quote:

---

Gus Bilirakis

http://www.ontheissues.org/FL/Gus_Bilirakis.htm

* Voted NO on investigatin

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME