S E R I O U S Tea party discussion, Republican implosion.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by KINGOFSHORTS, Sep 15, 2010.

  1. This is for a serious discussion only.

    Looks like 8 years of a BIG! government and BIG spending republican party has pretty much left the GOP in turmoil. The Republican party used to represent SMALL government and cutting spending.

    What happened to Paygo?
    Bush pushed through Medicare plan D which was a huge expense.
    Bush got us into TWO very expensive wars
    Bush signed anything that came across his desk.
    And of course Government is much bigger after Bush left, with Obama continuing the progress.

    The problem with the Republicans is they are no longer what was supposed to be Republicans and now voters have no trust in what the GOP represents.

    This opens up the door to the Tea Party.
  2. A much needed cleansing.
  3. Lucrum


  4. The Republican party used to represent SMALL government and cutting spending.

    I have a theory.

    Conventionally we consider Congress and the Presidency as gov't.

    What I think has happened is various gov't agencies have amassed enormous amounts of politcial power. Say for example, EPA or GSE's. They have become a 3rd political force, a force to be reckoned with either by the President or Congress.

    While members of Congress and the President have to account to the voter and endure any backlash, these bureaucracies have to answer to no one AND use the courts to pursue their agenda.
  5. Hello


    I agree, not to mention teachers unions, look what they are doing to christie in new jersery, they have run 6 million dollars worth of negative ads in 2 months all because he wouldnt give them a 4.9 pay raise when NJ had a deficit of 11 billion on a 29 billion dollar budget, anyone who takes on these groups has to have zero fear of losing their job, there is no way christie can compete with the kind of money the new jersery teachers union has, and if you actually push back to hard against them they will simply hold our kids hostage, and go on strike.

  6. Hello


    If we fall a couple seats short of regaining the house and senate it isnt the worst thing in the world, as long as the message is clear that big spending republicans will not be tolerated.

    I dont see the economy getting much better over the next couple years anyways, so we can still fillibuster any big spending bills, and it opens the door for taking back the senate, house, and presidency in 2012, which allows us to make serious cuts to spending, and also gets the message out that we will no longer tolerate big spending republicans, or career politicians who do or say whatever they need to inorder to get elected.

    If all we win back is the senate in this election we will not be able to make any kind of serious changes anyways, Obama would veto anything he doesnt like, and it leaves a shadow of doubt in the voters minds as to who was actually responsible for the brutal economy from 2010-2012. Taxes on Obamacare start soon, and it is going to cripple the economy for the next couple years, so us having control of one of the houses just allows the dems to try to point the finger.

    Republicans seem to be missing this point, if we take back the house and senate then what? Obama will never sign off on any drastic cuts to spending, and he sure as hell wont sign off on repealing Obamacare, so it will end up in gridlock anyways, and it provides a convenient scapegoat for Obama in 2012.

  7. That's the only valid argument for Bush's spending, which took place with a Democrat Congress.

    9/11 was not free.
    The first recession caused by the internet .com bubble was not free.
    Katrina & Rita are not free. Kanye West's bitchin & complainin added to that cost.
    Lastly, freedom which you take for granted is not free.

    Now Obama quadruples Bush's spending with no effective results, and all you knuckleheads do is bitch & complain about Bush! [​IMG]
  8. Honest question. Why as a Canadian, do you continue to refer to US politicians as "we"? Shouldn't you be stating "they".
  9. Hello


    Is your goal on this site to make yourself look at stupid as you possibly can? Even though you suck at trying to string together conspiracy theories i will give you credit, you are pretty good at making yourself look stupid.

    I live in the states you retarded truther waste of skin, i was born and lived in toronto until the age of 22, perhaps you should learn to read before spouting your mouth off.

    It doesnt surprise me though that someone as misguided and idiotic as you who believes we attacked our own people in 9/11 would be stupid enough make yet another error in reading.

    Or Is this another one of your gotcha conspiracy theories? Maybe i am actuallly a false flag CIA agent who has been sent here to debunk your theories and misguide the "truth" you are exposing on ET about 9/11.
  10. Yes, we are small pro government. Yes, we have been kicking ass and taking names since we began, now with roughly 1/3 of the usa behind us after only a few years of existence. Yes, the neocons are attempting to hijack our movement and rebrand themselves so as to avoid being associated with the republican debacle of the last decade. The Angle/Palin segment of the Tea Party, which is a minorty, represents this effort. We are trying to gut them out, while simultaneously milking them for money and votes. After we are the distinct majority, they'll vote for our small government candidates anyways, because their alternative will be left wing. We are a grass roots movement, and positions on specific issues vary from group to group. However, the common theme is limited government, and a desire to reduce the common size and scope of government.

    We generally favor lower, and flatter taxes. Many favor a move toward more consumption based taxation. We are nearly all proponents of Laissez Faire economic policies. Favoring as little government intervention as possible. Government participation, if it is to occur, should be minimal and temporary. We have the fundamental belief that allowing people to keep more of what they earn increases overall size of the pie, by incentivizing people to earn. Laissez faire policies create more wealth than interventionist policies by a large multiple. Nearly every emperical scenario supports this assertion. Not implimenting Laissez Faire policy comes at the high price of stiffled innovation, less efficiency, and the creation of less wealth overall. We have seen how Western Europe now has more millionaires per capita than the United States does. We believe this has very much to do with our parasitic taxation. For example, our corporate taxes are virtually the highest in the developed world. Also our "capital gains" tax, which discourages investment. If we are to reinstate policies of growth and innovation, these punative tax measures which punish investment(the fuel of innovation) must cease. (Then again, many of our opponents see the fact that Western Europe has more millionaires than we do as a sign of "progress" on our part)

    We want wasteful beauracracies to be terminated, as they are exceptionally burdensome on the taxpayers and rarely serve their stated purpose. For example the Dept of Education, which was created in 1979. Since then our students' scores have gone down the toilet compared to other developed nations. Before 1979, states each had their own dept of education, and states competed for the highest scores on standardized tests, and for high graduation rates. The quality of education was often a big draw for companies considering a certain location to set up operations etc. Now, thanks to the dept of education, and no child left behind, all public schools now pretty much suck equally. There are numerous examples of wasteful and ineffective federal departments which serve little purpose other than to provide jobs for beaurocrats, and to siphon out of the federal trough. I could go on all night, but I just offered one example. You guys would be shocked at some of the "departments" that exist, what their "duties" are, and their corresponding budgets. We are opposed to big government, interventionist endeavors such as the multi billion dollar, multi decade "war on drugs", which served as a convenient scapegoat to rub one off on constitutional rights, not to mention the billions it's tagged on to the correctional and judicial budgets.

    We believe that the government has no right in our private or personal lives. We are anti patriot act. Most of us see how the divorce rate skyrocketed after the establisment and growth of "family courts", and would like to remove the state from the convention of marriage altogether. Hence rendering gay marriage a non issue. Most tea party members defer to the fact that the government should have no business in our personal affairs on the gay issue. Because of this, there is now actually some tea party support from the gay community. We have the belief that what consenting adults do with each other is no business of the state. We think it's a tragedy that our "land of the free" now imprisions a higher % of their own population than any other nation in the world. As you can see, we are a diverse group of people and represent a diverse group of beliefs and values, who have all been drawn together under the common desire to have the government out of our lives, and out of our finances.

    We overwhelmingly favor a non interventionist foreign policy. The majority of us were anti iraq war. Most of us were pro afghanistan invasion(they were supporting and harboring the guys who attacked us), but disapprove of our presence there now, nearly a decade later. It's well past time we were gone. We don't believe in policies of "nation building", and interventionist plans. You will find some variablity here, but most of us are fine with having allied nations, but tend to dislike the dispersal of financial foreign aid. We are strong believers in free trade, and oppose protectionist policies. We are overwhelmingly pro LEGAL immigration, and anti illegal immigration. We are overwhelmingly anti amnesty, pro border security. We believe America has a right to select an immigration policy which is in the interest of America. This means securing our borders, and selecting individually, case by case, who will allowed to immigrate.

    Despite the propaganda, we are not "pro big business", in fact, we believe that the number one argument against big government is that industrialists always come take it over. If government weren't so disproportionately bloated and powerful, then buying it out would cease to be a lucrative endeavor. Small government is the best way to protect the public from predatory corporations. If corporate buyouts of congress and back room deals btwn politicos and companies ceased to occur, this would create the most free and fair environment for competitive industry. We know that small and midsized businesses have always been the backbone of our economic engine, and that they are now becoming an endangered species. We know that the ability of large corporations to buy out government officials or courts has always been the source of their unfair advantages over other businesses.

    We know that the nature of power is to corrupt, and that there is no perfect human. Even if you find an uncorruptable person, or an entire administration ( if such a thing existed), then what about when they were replaced? Common sense denotes that the best way of keeping corruption out of government, is to limit the size and scope of government.

    We are overwhelmingly pro 2nd amendement, and mostly pro choice. Again on abortion, most of us defer to the fact that the state has no business in our affairs. Some support the deferral of the abortion issue to individual states. On the second ammendment we defer to our constitution, and to how remarkably safe other developed nations with desirable gun policies are (switzerland, israel) .The largest point of ambivilance within the Tea Party is probably the death penalty. It seems to me like were split pretty close down the middle on that one.

    Last but certainly not least, THERE IS NO RACIAL COMPONENT TO OUR PLATFORM WHATSOEVER. We are not racists, stated or implied. Racial views are not a part of our movement. Never have been, never will be. In fact we are highly opposed to any racially based policy whatsoever. We have eleminated any and every element of racism in our movement as soon as we've identified it and will continue to do so. Furthermore we have minority leadership, and lots of minority support. There are numerous black tea party supporters, and one of our strongest leaders (Lt. Col. Allen West) is a black man. And of course, our historical founder Crispus Attucks, who effectively started the American Revolution, was also a black man. We have centuries of minority support and leadership, since long before it was politically en vogue.

    I hope I have answered some basic questions regarding what our movement is about. Please feel free to let me know if I can answer any other questions.
    #10     Sep 16, 2010