The TP officially turns on Boehner

#29
#29
KB5252 said:
They are no better or worse than the D's or R's are at this point.
Click to expand...

I tend to think of obstructionist politicians as worse than politicians that are open to compromise.

The premise of "we made promises to our constituents, so we cannot do x" is a premise that is illogical in any organization of representative committees in which there are any members of said committee that have made promises to their constituents that they will do x.

Democrats and Republicans are going to have to break campaign promises, and routinely they have done so. The Tea Party views such promises as absolutes, regardless of whatever concessions other representatives are offering. I find that deplorable.
 
#30
#30
therealUT said:
I tend to think of obstructionist politicians as worse than politicians that are open to compromise.

The premise of "we made promises to our constituents, so we cannot do x" is a premise that is illogical in any organization of representative committees in which there are any members of said committee that have made promises to their constituents that they will do x.

Democrats and Republicans are going to have to break campaign promises, and routinely they have done so. The Tea Party views such promises as absolutes, regardless of whatever concessions other representatives are offering. I find that deplorable.
Click to expand...

What we have now is two representative committees that say one thing yet deliver us another. This has resulted in the messes we see today, I think a change (in the short term) is what is needed to switch things up, to jump start us back on a path of fiscal responsibility. Compromise is a very good thing, dont get me wrong but right now the two bodies we have representing us are very different only in rhetoric, actions are very similar and their spending is over the top.
 
#31
#31
KB5252 said:
What we have now is two representative committees that say one thing yet deliver us another. This has resulted in the messes we see today, I think a change (in the short term) is what is needed to switch things up, to jump start us back on a path of fiscal responsibility. Compromise is a very good thing, dont get me wrong but right now the two bodies we have representing us are very different only in rhetoric, actions are very similar and their spending is over the top.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more with this statement; however, I think the responsible solution is to do what is needed and necessary, not to stick to some campaign promise. These Congressmen should have the gumption to negotiate (trade concessions with other congressmen) and then justify their concessions to their constituents.

Standing on a campaign promise simply to watch our credit rating drop and hand fiscal power to the POTUS (which is what happens in a default) is not going to help the situation; it might deal a death blow to Obama's career in politics; it might even be enough to "impeach" Obama in the House (though, not in the Senate and not remove him); in the end, though, it is simply grandstanding.

I would like to see these Representatives say, "Morally, I would rather do this; however, this compromise is a necessary evil and here is why..."

I am not saying that raising taxes is good; I am saying that right now, it appears to be a necessary evil in order to cut SS and Medicare. Keeping in mind that it is an evil and not a good, means that they should continue to work in the future towards getting rid of not only the tax increase but also the income tax, altogether.
 
#32
#32
therealUT said:
I could not agree more with this statement; however, I think the responsible solution is to do what is needed and necessary, not to stick to some campaign promise. These Congressmen should have the gumption to negotiate (trade concessions with other congressmen) and then justify their concessions to their constituents.

Standing on a campaign promise simply to watch our credit rating drop and hand fiscal power to the POTUS (which is what happens in a default) is not going to help the situation; it might deal a death blow to Obama's career in politics; it might even be enough to "impeach" Obama in the House (though, not in the Senate and not remove him); in the end, though, it is simply grandstanding.

I would like to see these Representatives say, "Morally, I would rather do this; however, this compromise is a necessary evil and here is why..."
I am not saying that raising taxes is good; I am saying that right now, it appears to be a necessary evil in order to cut SS and Medicare. Keeping in mind that it is an evil and not a good, means that they should continue to work in the future towards getting rid of not only the tax increase but also the income tax, altogether.
Click to expand...

I agree with bold, I don't think the tea party has it right on this particular issue either, it's obvious compromises need to be made in the short term to keep us out of imminent danger.

Where I think they have it right however is their stance on government spending, we as a people have to understand that serious changes that are going to hurt in the short term have to be made to ensure our stability in the long term (these decisions will need to be made in the near future). We need a party that will stand up to the inevitable backlash and make those tough decisions, a party that makes compromises to ensure their power for the future will never have the backbone this requires.
 
#34
#34
With regard to rigid chest beating insistent on the no tax pledge, let me just day that pride cometh before the fall.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#35
#35
nbakerld said:
Disagree. We've been talking about it as long as I can remember. We might be talking about it more now, but the TP probably isn't making any significant changes. It got hijacked by the religious right and the warhawks. A lot of the party isn't willing to cut spending if it's military spending so they can't even unite themselves for cuts, let alone America.
Click to expand...

When was there a serious discussion among our leaders about cutting the debt? "We" may have been talking about it but now one side is cornered into actually having to do something about it. Without the TP, the GOP would have given Obama his "balanced approach" already... both sides would have pranced out in front of the media praising bi-partisanship and "getting things done". Taxes would have gone up but not as much as Obama wanted. Spending cuts would have be nominal if any occurred at all.

The left is right. The TP is exactly why business as usual is no longer acceptable. The GOP's debt deal last year was a joke that got exposed... conservatives aren't falling for it this time around. That's why Boehner can't move. Again, the left and Obama are right about Boehner's hands being tied... they are.
 
#37
#37
sjt18 said:
Why? What part of more freedom and prosperity don't you like?
Click to expand...

The part about it only being for straight, white, gun-toting Christians.

Initially, it was only about economic freedom; rapidly, the religious right hijacked the movement with social issues.
 
#38
#38
therealUT said:
I tend to think of obstructionist politicians as worse than politicians that are open to compromise.
Click to expand...
Define compromise. I think it IS compromise to keep taxes where they are rather than lowering them. I think it IS compromise to only make cuts rather than eliminating programs wholesale.

You seem to be equating "compromise" to Dems getting what they want on taxes with gov't growth only slowed slightly.

The premise of "we made promises to our constituents, so we cannot do x" is a premise that is illogical in any organization of representative committees in which there are any members of said committee that have made promises to their constituents that they will do x.
Click to expand...
Good. So Dems should be ready to accept the Ryan plan that reforms Medicare rather than demagoguing it, right?

There are real philosophical differences here. They are mutually exclusive. If Obama gets what he wants but not as much then it is equivalent in football to winning by 30 instead of 40. He still wins. The other side still loses. You cannot simultaneously expand the cost and role of gov't and reduce the size and scope of gov't.

Democrats and Republicans are going to have to break campaign promises, and routinely they have done so. The Tea Party views such promises as absolutes, regardless of whatever concessions other representatives are offering. I find that deplorable.
Click to expand...

That's sad. You are looking at this narrowly and blaming a group (conveniently) that you have a bias against. You start knowingly or unwittingly from a "left" position then consider "compromise" something that isn't quite as left as the current position.

BTW, are you saying that Dem ideologues and constituencies aren't just as absolute?

I know you find it unpleasant and it is... but this is a zero sum game. Someone will win. Someone will lose. The TP is telling the GOP that moral victories are no longer good enough. Conservatives want REAL action to reduce the size and scope of the federal gov't.
 
#39
#39
therealUT said:
The part about it only being for straight, white, gun-toting Christians.
Click to expand...
Cite proof. Where has the TP proposed to deny any Constitutionally guaranteed right to anyone not in that group. Fact is they haven't. They simply haven't bought into the "force it down their throat" approach to using the force of gov't to change peoples' opinions on issues of conscience.
 
#40
#40
sjt18 said:
Cite proof. Where has the TP proposed to deny any Constitutionally guaranteed right to anyone not in that group. Fact is they haven't. They simply haven't bought into the "force it down their throat" approach to using the force of gov't to change peoples' opinions on issues of conscience.
Click to expand...

Hermain Cain considers himself a Tea Party member, correct? He is certainly against Muslims in Murfreesboro building a Mosque.

Michelle Bachman is a Tea Party member (in fact, isn't she the head of the Tea Party caucus in the House?):

And what we're seeing is just the fruits of leftism. It's suburbanites, the kids, that are watching cable TV, Did you know that? In a lot of these high rises where a lot of the suburban youth are doing writing or doing they have cable TV in their apartments. They're listening to al Jazeera, and they're being encouraged and prompted to go ahead and start these riots all over France.

There is a movement afoot that's occurring and part of that is whole philosophical idea of multi-cultural diversity, which on the face sounds wonderful. Let's appreciate and value everyone's cultures. But guess what? Not all cultures are equal. Not all values are equal.

And one thing that we're seeing is that in the midst of this violence that's being encouraged by al Jazeera and by the jihadists that's occurring, is that we are seeing that those who are coming into France -- which had a beautiful culture -- the French culture is actually diminished. It's going away. And just with the population of France they are losing Western Europeans and it's being taken over by muh...by a Muslim ethic. Not that Muslims are bad. But they are not assimilating.

And that's what I had mentioned in my previous response is that America is a great nation, with great values. We are equal opportunity for all. And it's because we all came here and we came together as one. Out of many one. Multi-cultural diversity says out of one many. And if we go with tribalism we will not long be one nation united under God.
Click to expand...

Christian culture is superior, right? France was beautiful until the Muslims came in; ergo, we must keep the Muslims out of America.

Glenn Beck:

When GLENN BECK interviewed Representative Keith Ellison, the first Muslim U.S. Congressman, in November of 2006, Beck revealed his incredibly ignorant and narrow point of view regarding practicing American Muslims: “I have been nervous about this interview with you because what I feel like saying is, ‘Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.’ … And I know you’re not. I’m not accusing you of being an enemy, but that’s the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way.”
Click to expand...

While it might not be the Official Stance of the Tea Party, it sure is advanced by the biggest political leaders and advocates connected to the movement. Has the Tea Party officially made any effort to distance the movement from these individuals?
 
#41
#41
The Tea Party has proclaimed that each group has it's own autonomous and separate belief system based upon localized politics and grassroots sensibilities. That is fine, but the only aligning principle has always been fiscal conservatism, and the ambiguity apparent in the party's national politics has allowed for the underlying tenets of social conservatism to fester under the surface and now come slowly to the forefront, with the impending election and the importance of carrying the Southern states, imo...
 
#42
#42
I love how much you guys get freaked out by us TP members.

We are not even that large of a group.

Is it because we have alot more money and education and power than you guys wanted to believe in the beginning? I remember when we first hit the scene and everyone was calling us a bunch of poor white hillbillies. Then the facts came out. We're actually all of your bosses. We're the people who are writing your payroll checks each week. You have fun fighting us. We're not going anywhere. You keep painting us as the fringe. We're not thhe fringe. We're the pissed off part of America that actually has enough cash to make problems for the politicians and they know it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#43
#43
PoochPunt3rdDown said:
The Tea Party has proclaimed that each group has it's own autonomous and separate belief system based upon localized politics and grassroots sensibilities. That is fine, but the only aligning principle has always been fiscal conservatism, and the ambiguity apparent in the party's national politics has allowed for the underlying tenets of social conservatism to fester under the surface and now come slowly to the forefront, with the impending election and the importance of carrying the Southern states, imo...
Click to expand...

you kinda speak the truth cow.
 
#44
#44
therealUT said:
Hermain Cain considers himself a Tea Party member, correct? He is certainly against Muslims in Murfreesboro building a Mosque.

Michelle Bachman is a Tea Party member (in fact, isn't she the head of the Tea Party caucus in the House?):



Christian culture is superior, right? France was beautiful until the Muslims came in; ergo, we must keep the Muslims out of America.

Glenn Beck:



While it might not be the Official Stance of the Tea Party, it sure is advanced by the biggest political leaders and advocates connected to the movement. Has the Tea Party officially made any effort to distance the movement from these individuals?
Click to expand...


I am confused by the question you ended with there, real. If you mean Beck, I think the answer you are most likely to get from those on here who identify themselves with the TP is that they either outright reject, or at least really don't care too much about, Beck's social conservatism.

But let's see what kind of answer you get.....
 
#45
#45
lawgator1 said:
I am confused by the question you ended with there, real. If you mean Beck, I think the answer you are most likely to get from those on here who identify themselves with the TP is that they either outright reject, or at least really don't care too much about, Beck's social conservatism.

But let's see what kind of answer you get.....
Click to expand...

Yet, ask them if they have read Beck's "Common Sense". Every TPer I have met, to include my brother, looks at that book as scripture.
 
#46
#46
NEOCON said:
I love how much you guys get freaked out by us TP members.

We are not even that large of a group.

Is it because we have alot more money and education and power than you guys wanted to believe in the beginning? I remember when we first hit the scene and everyone was calling us a bunch of poor white hillbillies. Then the facts came out. We're actually all of your bosses. We're the people who are writing your payroll checks each week. You have fun fighting us. We're not going anywhere. You keep painting us as the fringe. We're not thhe fringe. We're the pissed off part of America that actually has enough cash to make problems for the politicians and they know it.
Click to expand...

the guts it takes to actually type something like this is astounding
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top