tommyzax | Indy Week

Member since Oct 30, 2009



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “2012 General Election Endorsements

There is a trend here. As long as candidates are "all-inclusive" they are called meaningful. This is misleading. To be "all-inclusive" many times means to lean against white people or Christians simply because they represent an "old guard." But this "old guard" makes it possible for "all-inclusive" to exist. The REPUBLICANS, not the Democrats, passed the Civil Rights Acts. Please go to any history reference you like before you flame that. There is no "But.. but.. but.." Perception is everything, and "progressives" have been trying for decades to take credit for that which conservatives have accomplished. It's called "seize the means of production."

There is also a trend here to call Tea Party "rabid" or "political elite" simply because they are mainly older white people making a difference. Why not vilify the VFW? In fact, many blacks and Hispanics support the Tea Party, at least privately. Remember, Barack Obama was inaugurated in 2009, and the Tea Party was formed in the wake of his stimulus, bailout, and Obamacare measures, which spends too much money and only benefits the wealthy corporations. In other words, Obama did not defeat the Tea Party in 2008 because there WAS no Tea Party. Since 2009, many people of color and women have jumped on board a real grass-roots movement to stop spreading lies about America. What lies?

Obama did NOT stop the war in Iraq. We still have TONS of boots on the ground, black-ops, Blackwater-type contractors, and billions of dollars in aid which would be better spent here. Aghanistan is worse. We have troops in Jordan. We have dead Americans in Libya, and all the bootlicking media can focus on is whether or not Obama said the word "terror" in a Rose Garden speech. Who cares? What are we going to do about the dead Americans? Nothing! Instead, we are pitted against each other over words!

If you didn't like Bush invading Iraq without a declaration of war, why are you OK with our invasion of the Congo under Obama?

Obama has added 6 TRILLION in debt since 2009. Yes, Congress passed the bills but Obama SIGNS the bills. He doesn't deny it! If you were against Bush for spending 800 billion in 2 wars, why are you FOR Obama? He overspends by 1 TRILLION per YEAR! He ADDS that EVERY YEAR, and will in his proposed budget, which is online to see, and which EVERY member of Congress voted against. Look it up! His budget received ZERO votes in Congress and the Senate. ZERO. Not Sheila Jackson Lee, not Dennis Kuchinich, not your most liberal or progressive Congressman!

These are FACTS, not talking points. If WAR and OVERSPENDING do not concern you, what does? Social justice?

Those are WORDS. Social justice means opportunity for everyone. We have only seen a decreasing opportunity for EVERYONE. Never mind the what the rich are doing. Mind your OWN business.

7 likes, 18 dislikes
Posted by tommyzax on 10/18/2012 at 10:47 AM

Re: “Obama and Libya: From hopemonger to warmonger

How dare you question our fearless leader!

Posted by tommyzax on 07/14/2011 at 10:11 AM

Re: “Duke professor Orrin Pilkey takes on the deniers in Global Climate Change: A Primer

What is this "Denier" crap? If I disagree with you about climate change, I have an opinion. I can't hurt the feelings of climate or disrespect its history (as you would if you denied the Holocaust). Who cares! But the problem is, some people use their opinion on climate change to push agendas to control peoples' behavior, in the name of "community" or "responsibility." The questions are, (1) Who made YOU boss? and (2) Why should I believe that YOUR solutions have any validity? Even if you prove #2, I have the right as a free person to reject your authority. Then, force comes. Look at the light bulb law. Those who pushed control were SO adamant it was important. Then, when the law is challenged in Congress, all of a sudden it's not so important. TACTICS, not facts!

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by tommyzax on 07/14/2011 at 10:09 AM

Re: “Glenn Beck

Enumerating. You are:
(1) jealous
(2) hateful
(3) hypocritical
(4) lying
(5) false
(6) inaccurate
(7) without rebuttal
(8) complicit
(9) juvenile
(10) obsolete
Thanks for all you do.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by tommyzax on 10/30/2009 at 11:01 AM

Extra Extra!

Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.

  • Weekly Newsletter (Wednesday) - The stories in this week's issue
  • Weekly Events Newsletter - Our picks for your weekend and beyond

Login to choose
your subscriptions!

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2018 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation