Tea Party

[DenverJayhawk]

From a legit news source: CBS News

Take a look at what the Tea Party advocates and draw your own conclusions.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-...tom;mGalleryUL

My personal favorite is from O'Donnell who said physical virgins that looked at porn are no longer sexually pure.

What's scary is these folks are winning primaries, reflecting the populist majority belief in these thoughts within certain geographic areas. This country is *ucked.

[quagmire]

With O'Donnel, you can have your beliefs, etc, but if she is elected and uses the bible as a reason why her legislation needs to be passed then that violates separation of church and state, IMHO. Your religious beliefs should not interfere and get in the way of governing because people do not have the same beliefs as you do. People do not adhere to the bible like some people might. That is what is making me worry about O'Donnel.

With the New York candidate, stop using 9/11. I hate when politicians use a national tragedy for their advantage. The Republicans used 9/11 back in the 2008 elections at their convention and this Tea Party person is doing it saying Health Care reform is going to kill more people then 9/11? Seriously? Say it is bad for the country or how it isn't going to lower health care costs, but don't compare it to 9/11.

The Alaska candidate I believe it was, why so against the Department of Education? The article stated it isn't in the constitution. But, why singling out that one department? And I am sure a lot of supporters of the department of education use the elastic clause as a justification for it( whether it is correctly used or not is another issue). Has he been asked why specifically or any other reason why he wants to ditch that department? Why do conservatives seem so against education( Democrats like to cut away from the defense budget while it seems like the Republicans like to cut away from social programs like education).

That is my honest opinion.

[SonnyJack]

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

From a legit news source: CBS News

Take a look at what the Tea Party advocates and draw your own conclusions.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-...tom;mGalleryUL

My personal favorite is from O'Donnell who said physical virgins that looked at porn are no longer sexually pure.

What's scary is these folks are winning primaries, reflecting the populist majority belief in these thoughts within certain geographic areas. This country is *ucked.

Winning primaries is one thing, but winning the general election is something altogether different. I just can't see the independent voters going wholesale hardcore by voting for a tea party candidate. The lady in Delaware and the one in Nevada are kinda scary with their views. Maybe not too scary for the far right but too scary for the middle voter.

Perhaps in time the tea party could grow into a legitimate force, rather than just weakening the mainstream GOP, but not this November, IMO.

[DenverJayhawk]

my worry is these conservative quacks (not all republicans, but these "evangelical" idiots) are going to set the country back 50 years with their non progressive, science lacking, faith based approach to governing.

What's sad is there are people that actually believe this is the right thing for the country and voted for them. Morons.

[SonnyJack]

Originally Posted by DenverJayhawk

my worry is these conservative quacks (not all republicans, but these "evangelical" idiots) are going to set the country back 50 years with their non progressive, science lacking, faith based approach to governing.

What's sad is there are people that actually believe this is the right thing for the country and voted for them. Morons.

"Fear mongering" will always be a part of American politics. Both sides use it but the far right has it down to a science.

[scollins]

Originally Posted by SonnyJack

"Fear mongering" will always be a part of American politics. Both sides use it but the far right has it down to a science.

And the far left doesn't? Both extremes are very adept at it. Just look at all the "MY GOD, THEY'LL TAKE AWAY YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY OLD TIMER!" ads that the left runs against any conservative candidate.


And what do you see in some of these candidates that scares you so? Imagine that, a religious conservative is appalled by porn, or by "girlfriends doing everything but with their boyfriends"? That surprises you? Where have you been?

(I'm a non-religious conservative type, and I LOVE porn!)

Another conservative, religious candidate doesn't support abortion, of any kind, even when it is the dreaded and disgusting "daddy raped daughter" pregnancy? Don't you get it? To some, abortion is NEVER OK, regardless of the circumstances. Again, this surprises you?

(I'm a non-religious conservative, and I don't give a shit about abortion, one way or the other, really.)

Another says that Obamacare will kill more people than 9/11? He's probably right, although I'm against his use of the 9/11 terrorists attacks as a juxtaposition. I've seen government run healthcare in action (my dad has only VA benefits), and the results are very poor. If the government can even take care of our veterans, how the hell are they going to take care of EVERYONE??

And another wants to rid us of the two programs that will bankrupt this country (Social Security and Medicare)? I'm all for that! I'll be lucky to see a single cent of the money myself and my employer have contributed to SS and Medicare over the years. The retirement age will probably have to be 79 for the program to stay solvent for any length of time.

Now, this same candidate wants to eliminate the Department of Education. It does seem to me that we have too many layers of bureaucracy when it comes to education, and those layers suck up resources. How many levels do we need in our educational system? We have federal, state and local levels, all dealing with schools, and sometimes they have conflicting standards, goals and measurements. And it seems all of those levels have their own levels of bureaucracy! It is mind boggling.

Slide 6 on the link, the guy says that he doesn't believe that many Americans don't have ACCESS to health care. He is right, all you have to do is go to an emergency room and you cannot be denied treatment because you can't pay. That has been one of the central burdens brought up with regards to illegal immigration. Now, the little snippet on the bottom says that "the CDC estimates 46 million don't have health INSURANCE." Access to health treatment is one thing, not to be confused with health insurance. In any case, that is his belief, so be it.

And finally, another Catholic conservative doesn't want you to masturbate? Color me shocked again.

In all, I wouldn't necessarily characterize any of these positions and "way out there" or absurd. And naturally, this small slice has been chosen to present these candidates in a certain, unappealing light. It is just like "Jay Walking" where Jay Leno seems to find the "dumbest of the dumb" walking the street. The smart ones were all edited out, of course.

But there are far more crackpot candidates out there, on both sides of the middle. I give you GoodSpaceGuy! He was actually on the ballot here in Washington, running for US Senator.
http://www.colonizespace.blogspot.com/

Now THAT is a real crackpot! Oh yeah, and he runs as a Democrat....

[ghosthi32]

all this bipartisan bullshit is so gonna help the economy and our problems. Obama will kill people blah blah. democrats are better than republicans blah blah.

[SonnyJack]

Originally Posted by scollins

And what do you see in some of these candidates that scares you so? Imagine that, a religious conservative is appalled by porn, or by "girlfriends doing everything but with their boyfriends"? That surprises you? Where have you been?

Let me clarify my statement about "fear." The attempt is to scare the voters near the middle into voting emotionally rather than as informed voters. I consider myself to be an informed voter, but many adults get their information solely from Fox or MSNBC and that is frightening.

Do Democrats partake in the politics of "fear?" Of course they do (and I said so), I just personally feel that the far right does it more than the far left.

Since we live in a great country you are free to feel differently.

Off Topic: I just finished listening to the talking clowns on Squawk box and Governor Christie (R) from Jersey was whining about how former Governor Corzine's (D) past policies nearly bankrupt his state, and about how big a hole he inheritied, and how difficult his recovery task is, and how he has only been in office for two years, and about how it's going to take a long time to fix his states problems, blah, blah, blah. Joe Kernan (hard line republican co-host) just sat there shaking his head in agreement.

Hhhmm.....Christie is actually very much correct! But how come when Obama states the same thng about what he inherited, he is lambasted by these same people and told that he is responsible for everything now? No more blaming Bush policies.

Perhaps you do not agree with Obama's attempts to right the economy, but to ignore the fact that he inherited an absolute mess that was 8+ years in the making is just ignoring the facts. The tea party would have you believe that everything that is wrong with the nation is the fault of the current administration.

More fear...

[MONSTER11]

Originally Posted by SonnyJack

Let me clarify my statement about "fear." The attempt is to scare the voters near the middle into voting emotionally rather than as informed voters. I consider myself to be an informed voter, but many adults get their information solely from Fox or MSNBC and that is frightening.

Do Democrats partake in the politics of "fear?" Of course they do (and I said so), I just personally feel that the far right does it more than the far left.

Since we live in a great country you are free to feel differently.

Off Topic: I just finished listening to the talking clowns on Squawk box and Governor Christie (R) from Jersey was whining about how former Governor Corzine's (D) past policies nearly bankrupt his state, and about how big a hole he inheritied, and how difficult his recovery task is, and how he has only been in office for two years, and about how it's going to take a long time to fix his states problems, blah, blah, blah. Joe Kernan (hard line republican co-host) just sat there shaking his head in agreement.

Hhhmm.....Christie is actually very much correct! But how come when Obama states the same thng about what he inherited, he is lambasted by these same people and told that he is responsible for everything now? No more blaming Bush policies.

Perhaps you do not agree with Obama's attempts to right the economy, but to ignore the fact that he inherited an absolute mess that was 8+ years in the making is just ignoring the facts. The tea party would have you believe that everything that is wrong with the nation is the fault of the current administration.

More fear...

Maybe because the House and the Senate have been controlled by democrats for the last 4 years...

[MONSTER11]

Originally Posted by SonnyJack

Let me clarify my statement about "fear." The attempt is to scare the voters near the middle into voting emotionally rather than as informed voters. I consider myself to be an informed voter, but many adults get their information solely from Fox or MSNBC and that is frightening.

Do Democrats partake in the politics of "fear?" Of course they do (and I said so), I just personally feel that the far right does it more than the far left.

Since we live in a great country you are free to feel differently.

Off Topic: I just finished listening to the talking clowns on Squawk box and Governor Christie (R) from Jersey was whining about how former Governor Corzine's (D) past policies nearly bankrupt his state, and about how big a hole he inheritied, and how difficult his recovery task is, and how he has only been in office for two years, and about how it's going to take a long time to fix his states problems, blah, blah, blah. Joe Kernan (hard line republican co-host) just sat there shaking his head in agreement.

Hhhmm.....Christie is actually very much correct! But how come when Obama states the same thng about what he inherited, he is lambasted by these same people and told that he is responsible for everything now? No more blaming Bush policies.

Perhaps you do not agree with Obama's attempts to right the economy, but to ignore the fact that he inherited an absolute mess that was 8+ years in the making is just ignoring the facts. The tea party would have you believe that everything that is wrong with the nation is the fault of the current administration.

More fear...

Not necessarily everything, but the dumb fucks(democrats) are making it 100x worse by throwing our tax dollars around like it's nothing...

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by MONSTER11

Not necessarily everything, but the dumb fucks(democrats) are making it 100x worse by throwing our tax dollars around like it's nothing...

I would extend the dumb fucks statement to republicans as well. They had fun spending our tax money like it was nothing as well.

[MONSTER11]

Originally Posted by quagmire

I would extend the dumb fucks statement to republicans as well. They had fun spending our tax money like it was nothing as well.

Me too!!! That is why they all need to go.

Idea...

Congressional Reform Act of 2010


1. Term Limits.

8 years only, one of the possible options below..

A. Two Four-year Senate terms
B. Four Two-year House terms
C. One Four-year Senate term and two Two-Year House terms

2. No Tenure / No Pension.

A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.

[TMNT]

Originally Posted by scollins

And the far left doesn't? Both extremes are very adept at it. Just look at all the "MY GOD, THEY'LL TAKE AWAY YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY OLD TIMER!" ads that the left runs against any conservative candidate.

It's not a scare tactic when these candidates are actually saying that they would. The tea partiers are saying it...the typical republicans, not so much (I'm all about getting rid of SS too).

Originally Posted by scollins

I've seen government run healthcare in action (my dad has only VA benefits), and the results are very poor. If the government can even take care of our veterans, how the hell are they going to take care of EVERYONE??

Oh boy. Do you not realize the difference between government provided healthcare & government provided health insurance???? And just so you know the healthcare bill is neither government run healthcare OR government run healthcare insurance. However Obama's goal was to have government run healthcare insurance (public option). HUGE difference between the government actually running our hospitals.

Originally Posted by scollins

Now, this same candidate wants to eliminate the Department of Education. It does seem to me that we have too many layers of bureaucracy when it comes to education, and those layers suck up resources. How many levels do we need in our educational system? We have federal, state and local levels, all dealing with schools, and sometimes they have conflicting standards, goals and measurements. And it seems all of those levels have their own levels of bureaucracy! It is mind boggling.

So does that mean its grounds for elimination?

I find it funny when some of these candidates say we should even get rid of the USDA! Little do they know...

Originally Posted by scollins

I give you GoodSpaceGuy! He was actually on the ballot here in Washington, running for US Senator.
http://www.colonizespace.blogspot.com/

Now THAT is a real crackpot! Oh yeah, and he runs as a Democrat

The thing is that democrats don't actually take people like him seriously where as the right does.

[SonnyJack]

Originally Posted by MONSTER11

Maybe because the House and the Senate have been controlled by democrats for the last 4 years...

I believe I said 8+ years prior to Obama and you've somehow chosen to concentrate on only the period since 2006. Any particular reason? Bush was still President from 2006-2008. You're not one of those hard-liners who believe your party is unfailing are you?

Wait. I already know the answer.

EDIT: You had me worried for a minute until I saw you latest post. I have no problem with partisanship, but blind following is where I draw the line. Happy to see you're a reasonable person who I just happen to disagree with.

[SonnyJack]

Originally Posted by TMNT

The thing is that democrats don't actually take people like him seriously where as the right does.

Very true.

[SonnyJack]

Originally Posted by MONSTER11

And what is my party??? I never said the republicans were unfailing. I just think the democraps are wrong on almost every aspect as how to run this country. See my previous post and maybe you will understand.

My post has been edited.

[MONSTER11]

Originally Posted by SonnyJack

My post has been edited.

[UncleWede]

Monster,

I'd vote for your reform bill in a heartbeat. Problem is, there isn't anyone in Congress who would bring such a bill.

I have a friend on City Council in San Diego. When he was elected their finances were SCREWED. He refused his pay as a Council Member until after everything was fixed. I haven't talked to him in a while to see if he's getting paid or not yet, but THAT is the kind of public servant we need!!!

P.S. registerd non-partisan, I make up my mind on each INDIVIDUAL candidate.

[scollins]

Originally Posted by TMNT

So does that mean its grounds for elimination?

I don't think so, but as with everything, I think the way we manage education needs a serious reforming. I think the basic curriculum is fine, we just waste too much money and time in the multiple layers of "management" of the education process. The usual squeal is that schools need more money. Well, if school districts around me are at all indicative of the rest of the country, more money does not necessarily mean better schools.

The Seattle school district spends more per child than the Issaquah school district by a decent margin, and yet the Issaquah schools consistently turn out better educated students. They have to do more with less, and make it count.

But eliminating the Department of Education is not a new concept for Republicans. Reagan wanted to do it, as did Bob Dole. Neither Bush was interested in whacking the cabinet level department, so they never pursued anything along those lines. Probably because Laura Bush was a teacher and librarian. Probably would have kicked George's ass if he tried something like that.....

Ron Paul is naturally opposed to the department, so it would stand to reason that most Tea Party candidates would be as well.

[flyinb501]

I'm a lot more concerned about the fiscal problems with this country. I could care less what a candidates religious views are. This is why ppl are on board with the tea party.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by flyinb501

I'm a lot more concerned about the fiscal problems with this country. I could care less what a candidates religious views are. This is why ppl are on board with the tea party.

So you would vote in a person who would pass legislation based on what the bible says if they "promise"( politicians promise a lot of things.....) to fix our fiscal problems?( if we knew this of course. We don't know if O'Donnel would, but I am concerned that she might)? As I stated in my post above, I don't care about one persons religious views. But, if you're in a position of government( President, Senate, Representative, Judge/Supreme Court Justice) you need to check your religious beliefs at the door. You're governing people who don't share your religious beliefs. So if you try to pass legislation based on the bible and your religious beliefs, that is wrong, IMHO.

Yes we need to get our fiscal problems under control, but it doesn't mean people with extreme views should be voted in just because they say they will fix our fiscal problems. I think we all know what happens when we vote in extremist politicians( on both sides)......

Like I stated in another thread, I like the concept of the Tea Party, but the candidates that they back and other factors that are turning me off about the Tea Party.