Tell me where the tea party stands

[logan]

they need a leader they could be a very influential group, they need a criteria as well. unity will help them. about how much of the population do they represent?

about 25% of voters say they relate to the tea parties. but in reality they are demographically bush's base.

68% of Americans have a positive view of Progressives.

I think those 21% of Americans who have a positive view of militias are the same as the tea baggers. They are America's lunatic fringe.

whats wrong with a state supervised militia ?

 

[xsited1]

Odd. I seem to be recalled being told that the tea party has no leaders. So how can a group with no leaders have a list of principles?

People who support constitutionally limited government, balanced budgets and free markets don't require a leader for a movement. They simply require candidates for public office to believe as they do.

That sounds great, but what ticket do they run on? The Republican? Democrat? Libertarian? Tea Party Ticket? Green Party?

Independents need to regroup and unite as ONE if things are going to change. I don't see it happening with the Tea Party people, there is too much chaos and confusion on who/what they stand for.

Maybe they could organize and have one agenda/platform before election time.

They're trying to get the Republican Party to change, but it really doesn't matter. I seriously doubt the Democratic Party would ever be considered since they have moved too far to the Left. Remember this:

When the Founders of the American Republic drafted and ratified the U.S. Constitution in 1787, they did not envision a role for political parties. Indeed, they sought through various constitutional arrangements — such as separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches; by federalism; and by indirect election of the president by an Electoral College — to insulate the new republic from parties and factions.

The Role of Political Parties

Here's more information about the movement:

Tea Party Patriots | Find Your Local Tea Party

 

[Granny]

Odd. I seem to be recalled being told that the tea party has no leaders. So how can a group with no leaders have a list of principles?

People who support constitutionally limited government, balanced budgets and free markets don't require a leader for a movement. They simply require candidates for public office to believe as they do.

That sounds great, but what ticket do they run on? The Republican? Democrat? Libertarian? Tea Party Ticket? Green Party?

Independents need to regroup and unite as ONE if things are going to change. I don't see it happening with the Tea Party people, there is too much chaos and confusion on who/what they stand for.

Maybe they could organize and have one agenda/platform before election time.

They will vote for the nominees of one of our two existing parties. This is NOT a "Republicans only" movement. As for being loosely structured - maybe they're not. I think there's a great deal of communication and exchanges of ideas from one place to another. These "chaotic, unorganized people" were organized enough for a million or so Tea Partiers from all over the country to meet on the Mall in DC in a show of unity. By being in separate localities they have an active participation in having their voices heard. How much active and vocal participation do we have in Washington now? None. By being local they can also hone in on local/state issues and make their voices heard and try to change shortcomings at home.

The "Beltway Insiders" are dropping out one by one both Democrats and Republicans - they'd rather "retire" than lose out on re-election. And people are not happy right now - there are politicians who need to worry about re-election.

 

[logan]

my ideas

1.STATE RIGHTS: i believe in very limited government. the government should only be in place to organize the army. settle state disputes over resources. be the face of our union for other country's. furthermore i believe that the branches of government are not keeping one another in check the executive branch has to much power.

the government no longer answers to the people i feel that we are no answering to them.

the government should be more active in protecting our rights

2.TAXES: supply side economics should be applied much more rigorously.

3.IMMIGRATION: of course i am against illegal immigration. ( i really don't want to go into this subject right now)

4.HEALTH CARE: no mandatory health care.no health care based on socialism .
( the government should regulate the price of insurance i know it seems socialist to have regulations like this, but i do feel that insurance agency have a monopoly over us.)

good luck with school.

I'm not a tea party person and i don't really care what they believe in because they don't believe in anything... except of course that they're the same dead-enders who thought bush was peachy keen.

that said:

1. States' rights is a non-issue. If the states were supposed to be pre-eminent, we'd still be living under the articles of confederation. any other question about so-called 'states rights' is disposed of by the fact that no state law can conflict with federal law. they can give greater constitutional protections, but never less. and state law can be pre-empted by federal law, not vice versa. any lingering questions were disposed of by the civil war.

2. supply side is a scam... even daddy bush called it voodoo economics. and it's the reason for the crash in 2008.

3. illegal immigration is complicated because no one will enforce our current laws. the right sees it as cheap labor for corporations. the left doesn't want to offend hispanic voters.

4. health care... without reform, we would be paying 50% of our GDP for health care in 10 years. that would be unsustainable. there is nothing wrong with making sure people have health insurance. That isn't 'socialism.

how does supply side economics pull down the economy ? if taxes are lower therefore items are cheaper on the market , should that open up the market to allow more consumption ? i personally believe that nafta has hurt the economy more than anything

there are no real jobs now beside the service industry both of my parents were working in the automobile industry but their wages were cut and benefits.

i just dont believe that we are producing and exporting enough here . you could point out that there are tons of cars that were never sold but that is very complicated

also what about the house market the real problem here is that anyone could get loan and were buying things that they could not afford to pay for. they were signing mortgages with variable interest rates that could be raised at the whim of the bank.
so i sort of blame this on Clinton a chicken in every pot is not possible. his intentions were good but the simple fact is that you should not give out loans to just anyone.

for the past couple of years our economy has been floating on a bubble people where able to have homes built with loans they could not afford. the bank could pay for the houses but people could not . so the bank raises the interest



now im not trying to getting into an argument here i am just looking for a discussion

i do not claim to know much about politics but i am here to learn