The Tea Party Movement

[Nate505]

Being basically liberterian myself I was curious about the Tea party movement for a second or two...then I heard them talking about enforcing immigration laws, opposing gay marriage, and supporting "traditional values." Then I was done with the Tea Party.

It's why I could never vote for them. However, Tom Tancredo, illegal immigration extrodinarre, is running for Governor in Colorado as an American Consitution Party candidate, because the Tea Party candidate Dan Maes won the Republican candidicy and, to put it mildly, he might be the worst politician I've ever seen with no hope in winning. And Tancredo is for pot legalizaiton, as much of a nutjob he is on many other issues. I can almost see myself voting for him.

 

[TheMulletMutilator]

My big beef is where were these tea party folk when we decided to spend trillions of our tax dollars for nation building?

I thought we wanted more freedom? Yet they were silent when a former President decided that the government could now read our text messages.

If their intentions truly were noble, then why were they missing in action all these years?

If they want to be considered a "serious" movement, then take out the racial slurs, eliminate Palin, sell your stuff to a wider range of Americans and not just a bunch of pissed off old farts in the south, and actually come up with some solutions. And no, freedom, liberty, and uhhh freedom and liberty and... Freedom and Liberty...

Aren't solutions. we need specifics. We've been all ears now for a while, yet they continue to beat that freedom and liberty. Oh yeah, and don't tread on me.

It has really been shady since Clinton. He supposedly used accounting principles to make it look like he balanced the budget. Bush took over and spent spent spent. People really got tired of it at the end of the Bush Presidency with the TARP bailout. Then they found out about the Obama Stimulus and went irate. I don't think this has to do with race. There are some crazies in every group but most of the others are good people who want less government spending and less taxes or getting rid of the IRS altogether and adopting a consumption tax.

 

[sirkickyass]

It has really been shady since Clinton. He supposedly used accounting principles to make it look like he balanced the budget.

https://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administration_was_the_federal.html

 

[NAOS]

For all I care the GOP can be destroyed and the majority of the so-called mainstream Republicans can join the DNC. Because they are Democrats.

I'm glad you have such a robust definition for what makes a Democrat. Does this mean that you think that "liberalism" means "spender"? LOL

The fiscal future of this country is an awesome smokescreen.....while the aristocracy tries to pull the wool over your eyes. Unfair labor practices...... bad faith bargaining ..... the state of labor in this country..... get to the real material reality of **** and stop huffing and puffing about the abstract "economy". Once you do, you'll see that all you are doing is getting distracted by somebody jangling their keys.

Just to be clear: I don't think either party is doing a good job. I support neither. But the suggestion that the Tea Party has the right vision and a winning stride is ridiculous.

 

[NAOS]

https://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administration_was_the_federal.html

ah, c'mon, man! Don't bother him with that **** that says the wealthiest 1% should pay more!!!!!!!!! Don't bother telling him that their production is tied to the labor of everybody else and that they don't make their money in a vacuum!!!!! It's his goddamn money. period.

 

[TheMulletMutilator]

https://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administration_was_the_federal.html

https://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5656

You were saying? Look closer. They still didn't balance the budgets. Just some nice accounting tricks.

 

[TheMulletMutilator]

I'm glad you have such a robust definition for what makes a Democrat. Does this mean that you think that "liberalism" means "spender"? LOL

The fiscal future of this country is an awesome smokescreen.....while the aristocracy tries to pull the wool over your eyes. Unfair labor practices...... bad faith bargaining ..... the state of labor in this country..... get to the real material reality of **** and stop huffing and puffing about the abstract "economy". Once you do, you'll see that all you are doing is getting distracted by somebody jangling their keys.

Just to be clear: I don't think either party is doing a good job. I support neither. But the suggestion that the Tea Party has the right vision and a winning stride is ridiculous.

Unfair labor practices... LOL, I guess you are a big Union supporter. Glad to hear it.... There was a time for Unions and that was long ago. Now not only do they want the entire companies profit, but they want to own a piece of the company. Who in their right mind thinks someone working on the production line at GM with a high school diploma in most cases at best deserves north of 40 dollars an hour? Must be really tough to push a button. Unions are one of the reasons we now own a lot of GM. As for your Tea Party comment; I never said they were the end all right way of doing things. They supported a RINO and fake Conservative in John McCain at Sarah Palin's urging. But at least for the most part they aren't going out there are supporting losers and criminals. I see Charlie Rangel just won his primary and will again likely be back in the house. Lovely how that works.......

 

[NAOS]

Unfair labor practices... LOL, I guess you are a big Union supporter. Glad to hear it.... There was a time for Unions and that was long ago. Now not only do they want the entire companies profit, but they want to own a piece of the company. Who in their right mind thinks someone working on the production line at GM with a high school diploma in most cases at best deserves north of 40 dollars an hour? Must be really tough to push a button. Unions are one of the reasons we now own a lot of GM. As for your Tea Party comment; I never said they were the end all right way of doing things. They supported a RINO and fake Conservative in John McCain at Sarah Palin's urging. But at least for the most part they aren't going out there are supporting losers and criminals. I see Charlie Rangel just won his primary and will again likely be back in the house. Lovely how that works.......

You're right, why should something like "labor" be important when we are talking about "productivity"? God, sorry I missed the boat so thoroughly.

And, yeah! Why should a laborer own any stake greater than the ability to sell his own labor for a wage!

EDIT: BTW, the union that I'm a member of is asking for a 1-7% raise for the employees. A 1% raise would be about $1.17 million dollars in a $20 billion dollar budget. Are we going to get it? It's hard to say because they refuse to communicate with us. And, this union has organized 2 or 3 initiatives that would actually SAVE the company money (because they spend much of it in ridiculous ways), but they just must be anti-Union because they refuse to budge or show any sign of weakness to us. BTW, we are educators.... you know, doing that kind of "button pushing" work.

 

[moevillini]

...Remember that part of the Tea Party narrative is how energized and mobilized they are in these primary votes.

that's why in both those states the GOP acknowledges that they have very little chance of winning. Aren't they actually refusing to support the winner in Delaware?


anyhow, my feeling about the Tea Party movement is that they're a "style over substance" type of organization, big on clichés over meaningful content. I think they originated in opposition to some very concrete issues (TARP, Healthcare overhaul, the Reinvestment & Recovery act, etc) but now they're allowing those with a social agenda, rather than an economic agenda, to dictate more of their issues.

 

[franklin]

My big beef is where were these tea party folk when we decided to spend trillions of our tax dollars for nation building?

I thought we wanted more freedom? Yet they were silent when a former President decided that the government could now read our text messages.

If their intentions truly were noble, then why were they missing in action all these years?

If they want to be considered a "serious" movement, then take out the racial slurs, eliminate Palin, sell your stuff to a wider range of Americans and not just a bunch of pissed off old farts in the south, and actually come up with some solutions. And no, freedom, liberty, and uhhh freedom and liberty and... Freedom and Liberty...

Aren't solutions. we need specifics. We've been all ears now for a while, yet they continue to beat that freedom and liberty. Oh yeah, and don't tread on me.

Congratulations! You win the cliche award for this thread. Can you tell me where you got all these talking points from?

 

[franklin]

and stop huffing and puffing about the abstract "economy". Once you do, you'll see that all you are doing is getting distracted by somebody jangling their keys.

Yes, let's completely stop paying any attention to economic reality and listen only to windbags huffing and puffing for more and more and more control. Economic illiteracy is great! Look where it's gotten us.

I'm sure you're going to rant about a service lead economy next, and follow that up with cost of living nonsense.

 

[One Brow]

https://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5656

You were saying? Look closer. They still didn't balance the budgets. Just some nice accounting tricks.

Just to be clear, in the article you referenced, the claim in the article you quoted is that the budget *was* balanced while Clinton was President, but that Congress did it despite Clintion. No mention of accounting tricks. So, I wonder if you bothered to read what you quoted.