My Teabagger friend gave this response to the late night GOP House Rule change...

[FarPoint]

Now this friend has been a friend since childhood, since we were 2 years old...he is retired Air Force now....( I felt the need to explain this aspect). We will call him Jack.

At first he told me to read the Constitution...

Jack: "Please read Article I, Section 5 (2nd paragraph) of the Constitution"

Me: I responded in kind....."Sure they can do it....but what they are doing is not a representation of the people. Shuts out, locks out a balance of debate for "We The People"......

Me: The President is does not legislate. Boehner and the GOP only presented bills that were knowingly utterly ridiculous...example...refunding ACA/Obamacare which is now law of the land. Not sending a clean CR is also ridiculous and harmful to ALL...including you and the Tea Party. The GOP for some suicidal reason want a shut down.Democracy has been suspended in the House of Representatives. Trying not to be insulting and carry on a reasonable debate.....

but then....He went off the cliff.....

[/b]Jack: "When it comes to being ethical or not ethical what does the president not being legislature have to do with anything? And since you realize he is not part of the legislature, where you when he was unilaterally and unconstitutionally changing law with his exemptions to Obamacare. When he changes the law, is it the same law of the land that the SC ruled on? Two, so if it is the law of the land, so what, there is nothing that says it cannot be changed or repealed and that goes for Supreme Court decisions also. The Supreme Court once ruled slavery Constitutional. It is not law anymore. While the GOP may be committing suicide, at least they are standing on principle and doing what they believe is best for the country. I am for that. Obamacare is hurting a lot of people and as long as it stands it will hurt a lot more. Suicide for the better of the country; sounds honorable to me. Obamacare has to go, sooner or later."

end>

These people just can't connect the dots.....I've tried to guide them within reasonable debate but they are so far off the mark of actually understanding the Constitution yet throw it in our faces with every breathe.

So...how do I respond to this?

[truebluegreen]

1. You don't. Walk away.

[brer cat]

3. I agree.

They never listen to logic. Also, it makes them mad to be ignored.

[Bigmack]

2. Ask him his opinion on Thermohaline Circulation...

... He doesn't know shit about that, either.

As long as he's talking about things about which he has no knowledge, he might as well give his views on String Theory, too.

[truebluegreen]

5. Hey! I like that!

[FarPoint]

6. Yeap....

that is how I see it.... One can not engage in fruitful discussion when the other side is clueless yet ones arrogance tells them otherwise.

[CanonRay]

4. Arguing with these people is a waste of time

IMHO. They need some personal shock to bring them around. Rational arguments won't do it.

[Frank Cannon]

12. There's an old saying: You cannot reason someone...

out of a position they never reasoned themselves into to begin with.

[CanonRay]

15. I like that, never heard it before.

[FarPoint]

16. Agreed...he needs to feel the pain of the hand that

feeds him misinformation....then again, he probably won't assign blame to them, rather towards Democrats.

[Iggo]

7. "Have a nice life, Pal."

[FarPoint]

13. I understand....

I have known Jack all my life....kept in contact with him during his military life. He is or was a good soul but he started to change in 2000....Began loving O'Rielly and Faux News and now went teabagger. If he really understood what the truth was he would be a terrific advocate. I feel he has been brainwashed by a cult. That is what it feels like when a teabagger is born.

[Iggo]

17. I had friends like that, and I cut them loose.

It was easier than I thought it would be, and I feel great.

Your mileage may vary.

[Buddha_of_Wisdom]

8. Tell your friend Jack,

Hit the road, Jack, and don't come back....

[BlueToTheBone]

9. When you see crazy coming down the street

you go to the other side, you don't invite it in to your home.

Make like a tree and leave?
Slip out the back, Jack?

Seriously, you can not argue with crazy. And you don't want to be infected!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023840068

Sometimes we outgrow our 2 year old playmates.

[Arkansas Granny]

10. It won't matter how you respond to this. His mind is made up and all the facts you can

muster won't have any effect. I've had similar conversations, but even after they admit that they really don't know how our government works, they will tell me that I don't understand the problems. A closed mind is very hard to open.

[irisblue]

11. he missed all the civics classes huh?

the stupid and arrogance in that one is strong....
I would suggest that you will no longer talk with him regarding politics period, you will discuss recipes, sports, cars, kids, gardening, home improvements, but you don't need that anti intellectualism. I'm sorry losing a friend to teabaggery is lousy.

[FarPoint]

14. Yea...he was the jock....

Me, the majorette. ...

Late, we would meet up at different Air Force Bases and spend time together like in Great Falls, Montana....spent lots of time at Glacier...real earthbound activities.

[JHB]

18. There's a consitutional process for what he wants...

...and the House Republicans are currently trying to bypass that using internal procedural rules that are quite removed from their constitutional mandate. It is a gross and unprecedented abuse of their position, on par with a president marching troops past the Capitol to intimidate Congress.

That's the scale of what the Teabaggers are doing.

[FarPoint]

19. Damn straight skippy!

Well said and right on target.

[FarPoint]

20. Oh for Chrissake,,,

This is his response....

" Show me what part of the Constitution are they violating and I will be on your side. At least one of us attempts to be a consistent constitutionalists."

Apparently, he does not know what the constitution mandate of the Congressional members implies.

[JHB]

22. Ok, technically they have the right to do it. By that standard...

...any president also has the right, in his capacity of commander-in-chief under Article II, section 2, paragraph 1, to surround the Capitol with artillery and file one or two shots onto its surrounding grounds just to get the range.

Just because a president technically could doesn't mean it's anything close to a good idea. Neither is what the House Republicans are doing.

Edited to add: Considering his likely response: Under my hypothetical presidential scenario, sure, the troops would likely balk at what he was doing. That's what we are doing. He's the one arguing that the hypothetical president has every right to decide where the guns are pointed.

[NMDemDist2]

21. tell him to read Article 1 Section 8 paragraph 1

and explain how his teabaggers aren't violated not only the spirit, but the letter of our Constitution

to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

and A1, S8 P8 is really getting thrown under the bus too.....

[FarPoint]

23. It's all how one intruptes the laws, rules of the Constitution.

That said...the teabaggers act like Bible fundies throwing out scripture as a veil of holy protection.

[NMDemDist2]

24. how else can you interpret 'pay the debts' ????