Because two wrongs don't make a right.

10/28/2010 9:52:17 PM

I support LGBTpartisanship.

10/28/2010 9:53:07 PM

I support quadrepartisanship!

(greens/libs ballot access thread)
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=601863

Maybe even quintupartisanship w/ independents included, but no more than that.

10/28/2010 9:55:58 PM

yup, the Constitution Party is basically everything the GOP is stereotyped and caricatured as, only without the power

10/28/2010 10:12:53 PM

But what will the Tea Party's animal mascot be?

10/28/2010 10:15:35 PM

Quote :

"the Constitution Party"

Yeah, that name is as laughable as Liberty University.

...but they, and every other party, should have equal ballot access.

10/28/2010 10:16:37 PM

Washington advocated a-partisanship

and so does Andrew Sullivan, "Of No Party or Clique"

10/28/2010 10:26:46 PM

I'm for the


Get rid of Parties Party.




...wait

10/28/2010 10:27:25 PM

I like the Apathy Party.

10/28/2010 10:35:00 PM

I prefer pan-partisanship, in which ideas from all parties are welcome

(this is historically how America worked, like guess who first thought up the 40-hour workweek, guaranteed old-age pensions, free public education, and an end to child labor)

10/29/2010 12:04:34 AM

11/2/2010 11:00:34 PM

The egg came first.

11/2/2010 11:01:08 PM

In practice I'm a homopartisan, rejecting the lies and distortions of the RethugniKKKanz

11/2/2010 11:16:31 PM

No, Donny, these men are nihilists. There's nothing to be afraid of.

11/2/2010 11:19:27 PM

.
<----

11/2/2010 11:21:51 PM

Quote :

"purple america"

11/3/2010 12:20:15 AM

I like the idea of iPartisanship, owned by Apple.

11/3/2010 12:22:36 AM

^
Don't you give them any ideas!

11/3/2010 12:32:50 AM

^^^better emoticon:

11/3/2010 12:37:22 AM

To all the Democrats upset by Obama's recent action regarding taxes:


DON'T YOU FUCKING GET IT?
THERE IS CURRENTLY ONLY ONE PARTY IN AMERICA -- THE BIPARTISAN PARTY.


(Also, you call yourselves "Democrats", so why doesn't your party support ballot access?)

12/8/2010 5:54:36 PM

I think we should all support bisexual women.

12/8/2010 6:06:23 PM

I think it's funny how Democrats are for personal freedoms and limited government unless you're rich, work hard, a white male or a conservative christian, on the other side you have republicans who are for personal liberties and limited government unless your homeless, sick, gay, open-minded, poor, an immigrant or any faith other than christian. What a load of bullshit on both sides.......

Libertarians Unite!!!

12/8/2010 7:41:01 PM

Quote :

"But what will the Tea Party's animal mascot be?"

A big, retarded elephant

12/8/2010 9:24:14 PM

Thought it was the madhatter

12/8/2010 9:25:29 PM

^^^ ahahahahaha

12/8/2010 10:23:19 PM

Quote :

"you call yourselves "Democrats", so why doesn't your party support ballot access?"

12/11/2010 11:25:45 AM

the op pic made me lol

12/11/2010 11:26:24 AM

I LOVE THIS THREAD... NO Parties JUST PEOPLE!

12/11/2010 11:27:14 AM

12/11/2010 12:02:04 PM

The desire for bipartisanship stems from the premise that Congress doing "something" is always better than them doing nothing. That, in fact, is rarely the case. Almost all laws passed now are entirely unconstitutional, and beyond that, poorly implemented. The best thing that could happen for the American public is gridlock.

12/11/2010 12:17:48 PM

The Israeli parliament currently has members of 12 different political parties. Yet they don't get any more done than the 2 party system.

Its not bipartisanship that needs to go away, its congress.

12/11/2010 12:31:08 PM

i'm all for the Rent Is Too Damn High party!

[Edited on December 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM. Reason : ]

12/11/2010 12:32:32 PM

nope... i'm pretty sure you're an idiot...


We are saying people and politicians that vote right down their party line are worthless.

12/11/2010 12:33:40 PM

"The desire for bipartisanship stems from the premise that Congress doing 'something' is always better than them doing nothing. That, in fact, is rarely the case. Almost all laws passed now are entirely unconstitutional, and beyond that, poorly implemented. The best thing that could happen for the American public is gridlock, or even better, the repeal of all unnecessary laws."

(which is quite unlikely.... )

See:
message_topic.aspx?topic=606033
message_topic.aspx?topic=605999



^5
nice...

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 12:03 PM. Reason : ]

12/13/2010 12:02:33 PM

chit chat politics wootabega

the problem with bipartisanship is that most things that get bipartisan support (or opposition) are off the table altogether (due to the fact that both sides get paid off by the same people)

"bipartisan" stuff usually only occurs in arenas where the interests of the public have been marginalized

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 12:05 PM. Reason : .]

12/13/2010 12:05:13 PM

So, now there's this "No Labels" Party, supposedly trying to end party politics,
but they seem to consider themselves a bipartisan group....
WTF?


Also, they "borrowed" their logo... lol



I can't decide if these guys are a force of good or bad...
In my experience, independents are a nonsensical mix of left and right.
Are they all independents? Are they for no parties?.. or bipartisanship?... or a multi-party system?
They seem to be comprised of Independents, Republicans and Democrats... Where are the Libertarians?... the Greens?
WTF?

Quote :

"No Labels Movement Seeks to Thwart Party System Will a Post-Partisan 'Middle Way' End With Michael Bloomberg in the White House? Dec. 15, 2010 If the goal of No Labels, a bipartisan group launched Monday to increase civility and cooperation in American politics, was to find common ground for partisans from both sides of the aisle, it was successful. Conservative and liberal activists could agree on one thing -- they hate No Labels. "I think it's naive to remove partisanship form politics," conservative radio host Dana Loesch told ABCNews.com. "Politics are a competition and the winning side sets the agenda. There's such a wide gap in what both sides believe, it's hard to compromise on anything actually important." From the opposite end of the political spectrum, liberal blogger Matt Yglesias wrote a post titled "In Praise of Labels," arguing that "the idea that partisanship itself is somehow a bad thing" was misguided. But beyond an adherence to their own ideologies, some of the skepticism over No Labels derives from what some see as the group's real mission -- not just singing Kumbaya on the Capitol steps, but generating enough interest, support and treasure for a viable third presidential candidate come 2012. Enter the headliner at the No Labels kickoff, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. On Sunday, Bloomberg flatly denied he had any presidential asipirations. "No way, no how," Bloomberg told NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday. But the following day, Bloomberg gave the most recent in a series of public talks that have sounded like stump speeches, generating increased speculation that he might indeed be planning a run. His comments before 1,000 No Labels supporters came just a week after a speech on economic policy that attacked Republicans and Democrats in equal measure and in which he called on Americans to find a "middle way." "Last month, voters turned against Democrats in Washington for the same reason they turned against Republicans in 2006," Bloomberg said. "Democrats now, and Republicans then, spent more time and energy conducting partisan warfare than forging centrist solutions to our toughest economic problems." The organizers of No Labels include Democratic fundraiser Nancy Jacobson and Republican strategist Mark McKinnon, who advised George W. Bush and John McCain in their presidential bids. They have said the event held Monday on Bloomberg's home turf was not intended as a launch platform for Bloomberg, but that hasn't quelled the speculation. "It's too early to launch any kind of independent candidacy," said Hank Shankopf, a longtime Democratic strategist in New York. "People will continue to speculate. He's rich. He's popular. He's been a successful mayor of New York." "No Labels represents a real effort by real people who are sick and tired of partisanship and want to move move beyond it. Republicans have moved all the way to the right, Democrats have moved all the way to left and there is a huge middle looking for something else. If Mike Bloomberg isn't the independent candidate in 2012, it's going to be someone else," said Sheinkopf. McKinnon has said the movement is not intended to be a third party. It plans to form a political action committee to support moderate candidates from both parties, and has already raised $1 million in seed donations. But on Monday, it was Bloomberg who sounded the least hopeful about a third-party candidate meeting with real success. "In the end when you have an independent candidate it is the two major parties that get most of the votes," said Bloomberg."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/labels-movement-seeks-thwart-party-system/story?id=12396389

12/15/2010 1:16:57 PM

Quote :

"But what will the Tea Party's animal mascot be?"

Bald eagle.

12/15/2010 1:18:25 PM

rattlesnake

"Don't Tread on Me"

12/15/2010 1:23:14 PM

Quote :

"But what will the Tea Party's animal mascot be?"

a howling ape

12/15/2010 1:30:44 PM

The biggest problem with the whole fucking notion of bipartisanship is that it perpetuates this asinine notion that there are two sides to an issue and the right answer is in the middle. It is an intellectual straightjacket which attempts to codify and channel thoughts into one of two troughs without consideration of the individual merits and follies of ideas on their own.

12/16/2010 7:43:41 AM

^

12/17/2010 4:34:41 PM

Quote :

"you call yourselves "Democrats", so why doesn't your party support ballot access?"

12/23/2010 5:42:01 PM

Who the fuck are you addressing indy with that stupid question?

12/23/2010 5:48:02 PM

Bloomberg... No Label? He's a damn left winger that changes his speeches and party affiliation just to get elected.

12/23/2010 5:49:37 PM

soap box

12/23/2010 6:34:10 PM

omg

go back to the soap box

i'm trying to entertain myself with mindless bullshit and i have to see this in my chit chat?!

12/23/2010 6:43:40 PM

Quote :

"Who the fuck are you addressing indy with that stupid question?"

Democrats.

1/6/2011 4:11:48 PM