• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Tea Party Wins

Lengthy but well-written and insightful feature article.  Contention is that this has happened before, and that the Tea Party is starting to, and will eventually, mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/magazine/does-anyone-have-a-grip-on-the-gop.html?scp=1&sq=does%20anyone%20have%20a%20grip%20on%20the%20GOP&st=cse
 
Or the Tea Party is composed of main stream voters at the outset. One thing is certain about Tea Party voters,they are fed up with Obama.
 
tomahawk6 said:
Or the Tea Party is composed of main stream voters at the outset. One thing is certain about Tea Party voters,they are fed up with Obama.

Yes, and quite often for reasons that have no logical or reasonable basis in reality.

Great, they're fed up. In 2012 we'll see if it matters. I'm betting "no".
 
Redeye said:
Yes, and quite often for reasons that have no logical or reasonable basis in reality.

Ya, irrational things like massive, through the roof deficits, out of control crony capitalism and flushing hundreds of billions down the greenie toilet.

Those darn tea partiers . . .  haven't a clue about how smart Obama is, how he has reinvented economics, how he is saving the US economy. They just aren't smart enough to bow down and show proper respect to The Great O.  They just don't get the Hopey Changey Thingy.

Yup . . . they just don't have any touch with reality, just illogical or unreasonable stuff. 
 
I think those leaning left or right admit their parties are useless and the economy is in free fall. All the parties do is kiss the asses of the powerful and to hell with everyone else.
 
Actually, it wasn't so much the guys exercising their rights to open carry with a side arm, but rather the gys who exercised their right to open carry with long guns that turned people off.
 
Redeye said:
About slurs, then.

How about we just outlaw them altogether - as I note that numerous such slurs against other parties, policy groups, etc are frequently tolerated, regardless of etymology. Seems reasonable to me, and fair all around.

You know, it drives me nuts when someone is called for their behaviour in a certain area and they twist and turn things back.

I have never seen a sexual slur attached to a political party here until yours.

It was said that no discussion would be entertained, did you miss that?

Enough, already. Make your points without the slurs.
 
sprl said:
Lengthy but well-written and insightful feature article.  Contention is that this has happened before, and that the Tea Party is starting to, and will eventually, mainstream.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/magazine/does-anyone-have-a-grip-on-the-gop.html?scp=1&sq=does%20anyone%20have%20a%20grip%20on%20the%20GOP&st=cse

Indeed, and it is quite interesting to follow the rapid evolution of the TEA Party movement. The initial street protests against massive government spending was initially ignored, then slurred. TEA Party protesters attempting to engage their elected officials in "town hall" meetings rapidly discovered their elected officials were not interested in listening, and watching various tactics like filling the "town halls" by invitation only, bussing SEIU members to fill the halls, cancelling townhalls or moveing them to inconveinient locations (along with the endless slurring by the Legacy Media) convinced many that they needed to take over the process themselves. The 2010 midterms were totally amazing in the speed at which TEA Party movments took over various Republican "riding associations" (sorry, forgot the American term) and ejected sitting incumbents in some cases, and rolled establishment candidates for nomination in other cases, culminating in a remarkable victory not only in the House, but also a great many downline races at the State level.

The movement has now had three years to organize and grow, and from what I have read and heard, the movement is busy attempting to repeat its success, only they are now trying to win the entire electoral process from POTUS to the city dogcatcher. Simple time/space/distance considerations suggest this is not possible all the way up and downline, but the determined effort being put in place is changing the electoral landscape, and it is very possible the TEA Party movement will have elected enough people in enough jurisdictions to make a real and substancial change (the Newly Red states swept in the 2010 elections are seeing economic recovery due to the new Governor and State legislators enacting a TEA Party like economic platform of lower spending and freezing or reducing taxes and regulation, success should breed a certain momentum as well).

The American analogy which I liken this to is the raid eclipse of the Whig Party in the mid 1800's and its replacement by the Republican Party. The Whig establishment had no answers to the economic and political issues of the time, and were seemingly not too interested in what their supporters had to say about the issue. The end result was a rush of former supporters to the new party. The GOP in its current form is in a similar state, and the GOP "establishment" may find itself swept away for the same reasons.
 
cupper said:
Actually, it wasn't so much the guys exercising their rights to open carry with a side arm, but rather the gys who exercised their right to open carry with long guns that turned people off.

Why? What were they doing wrong? What law did they break? Besides, you need a citation for your statement. Where's the study\ poll\ public petition? Your opinions are yours and you have a right to them. Doesn't mean they're absolute though. Just in your mind. This hasn't been the first time either. Please stop stating your opinion as fact, without some sort of unbiased, independent corroboration.
 
Haletown said:
Ya, irrational things like massive, through the roof deficits, out of control crony capitalism and flushing hundreds of billions down the greenie toilet.

Deficits which largely were a product of Republican administrations and policies - and which everyone I know who watches US politics agrees are a significant problem. A combination of spending cuts, aggressive ones in some fields, and modest tax increases, particularly on the wealthiest Americans who are paying historically low rates, is the solution they're looking for, and it seems fairly reasonable. But none of that get even get off the ground when the other party has no interest in playing ball.

The Tea Party Movement is just a whitewashing of crony capitalism! That's exactly what backs it, what gives it a voice in the media, what makes it something that's being talked about it. That's why I hold it in such disdain. It's astounding that a bunch of working/middle class folks are willing to stand up for millionaires and billionaires who've exploited them all along.

Haletown said:
Those darn tea partiers . . .  haven't a clue about how smart Obama is, how he has reinvented economics, how he is saving the US economy. They just aren't smart enough to bow down and show proper respect to The Great O.  They just don't get the Hopey Changey Thingy.

I don't know too many people - that I'd seriously listen to anyhow - who make such claims. President Obama is, however, a pretty smart guy, and he'd likely be willing to work towards some manner of compromise to find solutions - the "Tea Party Caucus" that has a lock on the House of Representatives now has no interest in focusing on things that matter, and several GOP figures seem to have clearly signaled that trying to fix the economy and get the country on track is less important than trying to defeat President Obama in 2012, something I don't think they'll have an easy time with given their slate of candidates.

Haletown said:
Yup . . . they just don't have any touch with reality, just illogical or unreasonable stuff.

QED
 
Obama rang up $3 trillion in a couple of years on his various slush funds,I mean stimulus.There is close to a trillion dollars in unspent stimulus,why doent the administration turn that money back to the treasury ?
 
tomahawk6 said:
Obama rang up $3 trillion in a couple of years on his various slush funds,I mean stimulus.There is close to a trillion dollars in unspent stimulus,why doent the administration turn that money back to the treasury ?

You know that "$3 trillion" stimulus cost claim has been thoroughly debunked, right - and not only that - that was a falsified projected cost, not money already spent, either.

You know what did involve that number? The plan he proposed to tackle the problem. The one that the GOP is stonewalling over because of thier ridiculous inflexibility and inability to accept the reality that taxes will have to rise. The tax increases are pretty modest, though, and to be borne by top income earners primarily, not the middle class.

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-09-19/politics/politics_obama-debt_1_obama-outlines-taxes-on-job-creators-spending-cuts?_s=PM:POLITICS

I'm happy to discuss different points of view - but only ones based in reality, not the riduclous amount of pure BS being spouted.

 
recceguy said:
Why? What were they doing wrong? What law did they break? Besides, you need a citation for your statement. Where's the study\ poll\ public petition? Your opinions are yours and you have a right to them. Doesn't mean they're absolute though. Just in your mind. This hasn't been the first time either. Please stop stating your opinion as fact, without some sort of unbiased, independent corroboration.

Did I say that they were doing anything wrong? NO.

All of the News images and interviews from the Tea Party Rallies showed people carrying fire arms. But the media seemed to put more focus on those carrying long guns. I don't know, maybe because they were more visible.

I wasn't expressing my OPINION, I was making an OBSERVATION about what was being portrayed at that time in the media.

As for my opinion, I don't give two sweet #$%^ whether someone exercises their constitutional rights, as long as they do it responsibly, and within the boundaries of the law.
 
cupper said:
Did I say that they were doing anything wrong? NO.

All of the News images and interviews from the Tea Party Rallies showed people carrying fire arms. But the media seemed to put more focus on those carrying long guns. I don't know, maybe because they were more visible.

I wasn't expressing my OPINION, I was making an OBSERVATION about what was being portrayed at that time in the media.

As for my opinion, I don't give two sweet #$%^ whether someone exercises their constitutional rights, as long as they do it responsibly, and within the boundaries of the law.

Perhaps then "Actually, it wasn't so much the guys exercising their rights to open carry with a side arm, but rather the gys who exercised their right to open carry with long guns that turned people off. the MSM tried to fabricate a story from."

To me that makes more sense.

Just my  :2c: YMMV
 
>Deficits which largely were a product of Republican administrations and policies

US deficits are primarily a result of major entitlement programs which are in the transition phase from "net contributions" to "net withdrawals".  Extraordinary spending (ie. war operations, regardless whether they are on or off budget) and associated policies have continued despite 3 years of a change of administration, so those particular policies no longer have any single factional attachment.  Do you think the current deficit is really going to fall much when the temporary tax cuts expire?

>The Tea Party Movement is just a whitewashing of crony capitalism! That's exactly what backs it, what gives it a voice in the media, what makes it something that's being talked about it.

Bilge.  Go ahead: find the statements of TP principles which avow to promote and protect crony capitalism and post them here.

>President Obama is, however, a pretty smart guy

He may be one of the stupidest people alive to rise to office at his level.  How frigging dumb do you have to be to ignore the crisis facing your nation - which has been in evidence for months, and is evident to all and discussed widely - and swan off to cherry pick your favourite to-do items off your ideological wish list?  Selection and maintenance of the aim: critical failure.  Identification of vital ground: critical failure.  Main effort: critical failure.  General strategic acumen: critical failure.  Obama is a man who wants to be seen as the president but doesn't want to do the actual job.  He's the equivalent of the guy who shows up at Remembrance Day with a uniform and medals he bought second-hand and a collection of war stories cultivated in his own mind.

Failure to unseat Obama in 2012 will portend badly for the US; it makes perfect sense to hamstring him as much as possible now and work toward his defeat.
 
Check out these 1%ers, and then guess which political party they support!

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=46849

Sorry this was supposed to go to the US economy thread
 
Brad Sallows said:
Do you think the current deficit is really going to fall much when the temporary tax cuts expire?

Moot point considering that the 9% (or greater depending on how you look at the numbers) unemployment rate will dampen the revenue generated by an increase in tax rates.

Brad Sallows said:
Bilge.  Go ahead: find the statements of TP principles which avow to promote and protect crony capitalism and post them here.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/2010/0915/What-is-the-tea-party-and-how-is-it-shaking-up-American-politics/(page)/2
Tea Party Patriots says it has more than 1,000 community-based tea party groups around the country. The group’s mission is to “attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets,” according to its website.

And http://www.thecontract.org/support/

Particularly the following items:

Reject emissions trading: Stop the "cap and trade" administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. (Point of Note: I do not agree with the concept of cap and trade either, but not for the same reasons as put forth by most)

Pass an 'All-of-the-Above' Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (A convenient argument to give more access to the oil companies)

Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend permanently the George W. Bush temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011. (Ask Warren Buffet why he wants to pay more, then ask TP memebrs why they want to keep cutting revenue and tax rates when they are both at historic lows, this benefits corporations and "job creators" more than anyone else)

Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.(Benefits the health insurance industry by allowing them to go back to double digit annual increases in premiums and limiting payouts for bogus reasoning)

Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (A veiled threat to move on more deregulation in favor of corpations, although I agree there are areas of duplication and unnecessary oversight that need to be addressed. This replaced the "LIMITED GOVERNMENT" policy, but this is how they will go about getting it)

Brad Sallows said:
He may be one of the stupidest people alive to rise to office at his level.  How frigging dumb do you have to be to ignore the crisis facing your nation - which has been in evidence for months, and is evident to all and discussed widely - and swan off to cherry pick your favourite to-do items off your ideological wish list?  Selection and maintenance of the aim: critical failure.  Identification of vital ground: critical failure.  Main effort: critical failure.  General strategic acumen: critical failure.  Obama is a man who wants to be seen as the president but doesn't want to do the actual job.  He's the equivalent of the guy who shows up at Remembrance Day with a uniform and medals he bought second-hand and a collection of war stories cultivated in his own mind.

::)

Brad Sallows said:
Failure to unseat Obama in 2012 will portend badly for the US; it makes perfect sense to hamstring him as much as possible now and work toward his defeat.

Well, the GOP will need to find a better candidate than what is on the plate now.
 
Cupper, the American Constitution was designed to reduce the ability of people to centralize or monopolize power, the very opposite of Crony Capitalism. Your first link is an Epic Fail, and if anything brilliantly supports Brad's point.

Most of the rest of your links and examples are specific examples of policies and programs designed to reduce or eliminate the power of the State to choose economic "winners and loosers"; once again the very opposite of Crony Capitalism.

Perhaps you need to brush up on your economics and political science, or alternatively use the </sarcasm> if you are really stepping up to the Limited Government side of the plate with your posts.
 
Thucydides said:
Perhaps you need to brush up on your economics and political science, or alternatively use the </sarcasm> if you are really stepping up to the Limited Government side of the plate with your posts.

No. I understand the original intent of the Constitution, but things are a lot different than they were prior to the turn of the 19th Century. It's not that I don't believe in limited government, and yes I agree in one way I've backed up Brad's arguments.

But the problem with the concept is that there are unintended consequences with bringing in limited government control of the economy, society and industry. And if the corporations want to be unfettered by government regulations, wouldn't it be in their interests to support these policies?

My point is that the policies I noted here rather than eliminate crony capitalism, I feel, will only exacerbate the problem. The real solution is to eliminate private / individual contributions for political parties and causes, and have only government funds for elections. Eliminate Lobbying. Get the money out of politics, so that it creates politician that focus on doing the job they were elected to do, and not devoting up to 70% of their time fundraising for the nexy election.
 
For those who can read a graph.  :)

obama-deficit-2011.jpg
 
Back
Top