Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think the problem is, and Oddball can correct me if I am wrong in representing his point, that it is more correct to say that the TPM is a result of the Bush administration. The GWB admin gave the TPM an elan. Then Obama came along with even more spending and the TPM was in full swing.
Too many think GWB was a neocon. Sure, he was propped up by many neocons, but he was a disappointment to many of us. So, he turned out not to be all that good of a neocon.
Anyway, as I don't like speaking for others, if I am wrong about what Oddball was saying about why and how the TPM started, I hope he corrects me.
Just trying to facilitate communication, here, by perhaps identifying misunderstandings.
The Tea Party in it's current form is not a reaction to the GWB administration. It's modern roots can be found from Rick Santelli on February 19, 2009. The Tea Party in it's original form can be traced back to Ron Paul and it was a very small group, however it has since been hijacked by Fox News among others.
The issue with the Tea Party is that a lot of them have no idea what the federal budget actually entails. They believe the government is spending way too much money and that should end. The question then comes what to cut and by how much. However, you have plenty of people who somehow believe that cutting waste, NPR, and foreign aid will result in a balanced budget. Which is why it comes as no surprise why so many people support such a measure.
If more people understood the direct implications of such a move, just like with not raising the debt ceiling, they wouldn't likely support it.
You can't have a movement that doesn't want to see cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Defense, doesn't want to raise taxes, and expect to have a balanced budget. It's simply not possible.
I don't know why. Why does anyone sign a pledge. Personally I think it's stupid to do such a thing.
I'd like a link btw.
Where's the link that shows all of these folks signing a pledge?
I don't know why the Republicans would sign a pledge. You'll have to ask them since they're all pledge happy except Jon Huntsman and Gary Johnson.
Here's the list:
Americans for Tax Reform :: What is the Taxpayer Protection Pledge?
That would be correct.
And Shrub was a total neocon...Lots of idiotic and endless domestic spending and expansion of bureaucracy at home, lots of military empire abroad.
Moreover, if you're going to take one poll about one aspect of the movement and try to use it to paint a picture of the overall movement, you're either incredibly simpleminded or willfully dishonest.
In the case of Mudbutt, I'll be going with the latter.
I just used that poll as an example to a larger point. Just about every other poll reflects the point I've made. As does the voting by the Tea Party Caucus.
Or are you going to try and sell me that their vast support for the Patriot Act was them defending liberty?
The truth about Rick Santelli's rant, for those not all on the same page.
Rick Santellis Planted Rant ? | The Big Picture
You're an idiot. If GM had not been bailed out the stockholders and employees would have been screwed as well as the small businesses which supplied GM and their emplyees.
Oh yeah, when did you interview all the employees at GM?
Bailing out GM was clear socialism. You had companies who had been prudent and successful who had to compete with a company that failed and was backed by government money confiscated by government guns. Government bailed them out and set the terms for their continued operation. Failure is a critical part of capitalism. It is socialism where for the greater good the worst company is bailed out and controlled by government and then harms responsible companies who weren't.
You're full of digested bull feed. GM was too big to fail. The loss of thousands (tens of?) jobs would have echoed beyond GM and it's suppliers. more homes would have foreclosed, more bills unpaid, more small business failures and many more unemployed; that has not happened. Your kind of ideological purity is keeping us in economic malaise, a little pragmatic thinking is required.
It looks like a very simple and straightforward pledge. So, signing it means you owe your soul to Grover Fucken Norquist???
I think if you go back and look at the commissions report, what we were talking about is getting significant dynamic effects by taking away tax credits, lowering the tax rate and having an economic increase that will actually increase the revenues to the federal government, Coburn said. When asked by host David Gregory about how this conflicted with the tax ATR tax pledge, Coburn responded: I think which pledge is most important, David, is the pledge to, to uphold your oath to the Constitution of the United States or a pledge from a special interest group who, who claims to speak for all of American conservatives when, when in fact they really dont. The fact is, is we have enormous urgent problems in front of us that have to be addressed, and they have to be addressed in a way that will get 60 votes in the Senate, a majority vote in the House, and something that the president will sign.
You wrote, "Socialism is a centrally planned economy. Rather then arguing the definition of words, why don't you give me an example of anything that Democrats have actually supported during the Obama administration that is not further government control over the economy. Since they are not socialist and they are centrist, they should be pretty split. But I'm only asking for one thing that is not socialist central economic planning that they proposed or actually supported. Go.
I wrote:
"Here's an academic definition quoted from "A Glossary of Political Economy Terms; see:
"Socialism: A Glossary of Political Economy Terms - Dr. Paul M. Johnson
"Socialism
A class of ideologies favoring an economic system in which all or most productive resources are the property of the government, in which the production and distribution of goods and services are administered primarily by the government rather than by private enterprise, and in which any remaining private production and distribution (socialists differ on how much of this is tolerable) is heavily regulated by the government rather than by market processes. Both democratic and non-democratic socialists insist that the government they envision as running the economy must in principle be one that truly reflects the will of the masses of the population (or at least their "true" best interests), but of course they differ considerably in their ideas about what sorts of political institutions and practices are required to ensure this will be so. In practice, socialist economic principles may be combined with an extremely wide range of attitudes toward personal freedom, civil liberties, mass political participation, bureaucracy and political competition, ranging from Western European democratic socialism to the more authoritarian socialisms of many third world regimes to the totalitarian excesses of Soviet-style socialism or communism."
Now, you explain how you conclude Obama and the Democrats are socialists.
The bailout and takeover of GM...
Last time I checked only socialist dictators seized companies.
In the real world you fail or you survive....
Oh yeah - 99% of UAW votes the democrat ticket.
You're an idiot. If GM had not been bailed out the stockholders and employees would have been screwed as well as the small businesses which supplied GM and their emplyees.
Oh yeah, when did you interview all the employees at GM?
The stockholders did get fucked dummy...........
The only clowns that made out of that bullshit were UAW workers.
It looks like a very simple and straightforward pledge. So, signing it means you owe your soul to Grover Fucken Norquist???
I never said that, you did. What I'm curious about is why they bothered to sign Norquist's pledge.
Tom Coburn, who is perhaps the most fiscal Conservative member of Congress has some interesting thoughts on the matter.
Grover Norquist Claims Tom Coburn ‘Lied His Way’ Into Office - Forbes
I think if you go back and look at the commissions report, what we were talking about is getting significant dynamic effects by taking away tax credits, lowering the tax rate and having an economic increase that will actually increase the revenues to the federal government, Coburn said. [/B] The fact is, is we have enormous urgent problems in front of us that have to be addressed, and they have to be addressed in a way that will get 60 votes in the Senate, a majority vote in the House, and something that the president will sign.
When asked by host David Gregory about how this conflicted with the tax ATR tax pledge, Coburn responded: I think which pledge is most important, David, is the pledge to, to uphold your oath to the Constitution of the United States or a pledge from a special interest group who, who claims to speak for all of American conservatives when, when in fact they really dont.
The truth about Rick Santelli's rant, for those not all on the same page.
Rick Santellis Planted Rant ? | The Big Picture
I said the opposite. And like an idiot you proved my point in your quote
The republican party will have to push the tp to the side if they want any main stream votes.
They will lose this base if they please the middle.
They will lose the middle if they please the TP.
They can not win with them or without them.
Unless of course they can cheat enough to win.
They have done it before and the history is in the court documents.
I don't know why the Republicans would sign a pledge.
I wonder if these two "parties" will split during the 2012 Election or unite.
If they each have a candidate to run, along with the democrats and the libertarians, what do you think will happen in the election?
Or do you think the two (GOP and Tea Party) will come together and run one person?
If they are divided, and each runs someone on their ticket, won't that divide the party base of the conservative movement?
The question is a serious one, which excludes any input from the likes of you.The republican party will have to push the tp to the side if they want any main stream votes.
They will lose this base if they please the middle.
They will lose the middle if they please the TP.
They can not win with them or without them.
Unless of course they can cheat enough to win.
They have done it before and the history is in the court documents.
Now, STFU and go take your Paxil.
You're an idiot. If GM had not been bailed out the stockholders and employees would have been screwed as well as the small businesses which supplied GM and their emplyees.
Oh yeah, when did you interview all the employees at GM?
Bailing out GM was clear socialism. You had companies who had been prudent and successful who had to compete with a company that failed and was backed by government money confiscated by government guns. Government bailed them out and set the terms for their continued operation. Failure is a critical part of capitalism. It is socialism where for the greater good the worst company is bailed out and controlled by government and then harms responsible companies who weren't.
You're full of digested bull feed. GM was too big to fail. The loss of thousands (tens of?) jobs would have echoed beyond GM and it's suppliers. more homes would have foreclosed, more bills unpaid, more small business failures and many more unemployed; that has not happened. Your kind of ideological purity is keeping us in economic malaise, a little pragmatic thinking is required.
I said the opposite. And like an idiot you proved my point in your quote
That wasn't my quote, that was Senator Tom Coburn. A Conservative Republican and the most fiscal Conservative of Congress. He's the one who proposed the $9 trillion debt reduction plan. The same one where many Tea Partiers were calling him a traitor because it included $1 trillion in tax increases.
However, the rest of the Republicans for the most part have signed said pledge.
The stockholders did get fucked dummy...........
The only clowns that made out of that bullshit were UAW workers.
You never addressed post #119.
Nice race card.Perhaps you should visit there sites . They explain quite clearly they work through democrats.
LOL...right. You aren't even trying...
Wanna bet Stormfront supports a bunch of Tea Bagger candidates?
