1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 23
Tom Heath
Tom Heath Webmaster
10/28/10 1:48 p.m.

Woo woo!

Here comes the Tea Party Express!

I can't hear about the Tea Party and not think of that horrible song.

I'm completely OK with the concept of health care reform, but the execution was horrible. Blaming one side or the other for that legislation is silly. Pretending that any political party (including the Tea Party) is looking out for your interests before their own is worse.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker SuperDork
10/28/10 2:08 p.m.

I don't know much, really... but I know how this ends.

RX Reven'
RX Reven' Reader
10/28/10 2:12 p.m.

Cone Junky,

Being a native of California, Oldsaw’s comments really resonate with me.

They say of New York “if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere” and I’ve reformulated that thinking to California by saying “if you can’t make it here, you can’t make it anywhere”…we’ve got every advantage imaginable and yet by all measures: unemployment, tax rates, property value decline, state exodus rates, etc., we’re consistently at or near the bottom relative to other states.

Californian policies tend to be several years ahead of the rest of the nation so everybody else, look out, this is what you have to look forward to.

The only thing I’d add to Oldsaw’s comments is a rebuttal to your “majority vote of the United States of America” reference…we didn’t get to vote the health care reform bill, or the wall street bailout or the UAW bailout or the 786 billion stimulus package. Those things were all forced upon us and polls consistently show that the majority of Americans disapprove of them. I believe this explains why President Obama’s approval ratings are well below 50% & the House of Representatives is nearly certain to have a Republican majority in just a week.

Otto_Maddox
Otto_Maddox Reader
10/28/10 2:16 p.m.

In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:

As Rodney King said "Why can't we all just get along?"

Let's talk about religion instead. I prefer Aqua Buddha.

DeadSkunk
DeadSkunk HalfDork
10/28/10 2:18 p.m.

2 cents worth from a LEGAL alien. The constant negative electioneering is driving me nuts because all of them blame their opponents and not one of them has said what I believe to be necessary in this country and that is ,the deficit/debt can only be reduced/eliminated by reducing government spending AND increasing our taxes. Depending on whose numbers one wants to believe, every man ,woman and child owns $47,000 of the debt. The Dems placate me by promising to tax the wealthy and big corporations. The Republicans tell me they'll give me a tax cut and I'll spend it to stimulate the economy, creating enough new jobs to pay down the deficit/debt without increasing personal tax rate. They're all a pack of liars trying to assure their own re-elections, nothing more. Had a succession of prior governments focussed on balancing annual government expenditures against the portion of government "income" generated by taxes alone we wouldn't be in this crunch. They insist on looking at the amount of cash the treasury has as available for spending. That's how the Social Security surplusses have disappeared and aren't availbale now that disbursements are exceeding payouts. No one pops up in Washington and says"Here's your tax bill for the war we just started". They just keeping mortgaging more and more, and we (really,you guys, cuz I can't vote.) let them get away with it. Until politicians are made(by law, maybe?) to balance the books every year, we won't see any real change or by partisanship. Rant over. Now I'll go back to being the quiet immigrant living is this wonderful country of yours. I do mean that part sincerely. Flame away!

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker SuperDork
10/28/10 2:21 p.m.
Otto_Maddox wrote: In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker: Let's talk about religion instead. I prefer Aqua Buddha.

Maybe we should have a few drinks before we get to religion again.

DeadSkunk
DeadSkunk HalfDork
10/28/10 2:28 p.m.

I'm all for a few drinks !!! Where is that case of Labatt's anyway..........

HiTempguy
HiTempguy HalfDork
10/28/10 2:45 p.m.
Otto_Maddox wrote: In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker: As Rodney King said "Why can't we all just get along?" Let's talk about religion instead. I prefer Aqua Buddha.

Is that like Aqua Velva but for monks?

As for Labatt's, people still drink that stuff? I mean honestly, in my 5 years of legal drinking I've never gone into a bar and heard somebody order a bottle of Labatts or see them drink it.

DeadSkunk
DeadSkunk HalfDork
10/28/10 2:51 p.m.

Around here (Ann Arbor, Mi.) if you bring anything to the hockey dressing room other than Labatts, you'll hear about it. I thought it odd, too, but I'll do my best to fit in when it's my turn to bring the beer !

Tom Heath
Tom Heath Webmaster
10/28/10 2:52 p.m.
DeadSkunk wrote: They're all a pack of liars trying to assure their own re-elections, nothing more.

Dingdingding! Winner!

Otto_Maddox
Otto_Maddox Reader
10/28/10 3:04 p.m.

In reply to HiTempguy:

Aqua Buddha is the god of the tea party, or Rand Paul anyway, or merely part of a silly college prank by Rand Paul, depending on who you ask.

Derick Freese
Derick Freese HalfDork
10/28/10 4:00 p.m.

Maybe the collective GRM board needs to form a political party.

I'm a registered Democrat. Before you start flaming me, it's because our local politicians is nearly all Dem.. A great deal of our local elections are decided during the local primaries.

I also used to think that I was fairly liberal, but thin I realized that I'm only liberal when it comes to social issues. When it comes to money, I bleed as red as I can.

I am with Tom, health care needed reform. It needed reform, but we got a convoluted mess that's going to bit a lot of people in the ass. I would have been happy to be able to have the same insurance buying power as a large corporation, but that didn't happen.

To me, everything seems like it's circling the drain right now. Left blaming the right, the right blaming the left, a few obnoxious loud people way in right field that understand money but still want control, and about half a percent of the population that really cares about the welfare of the union and understands that we all should have the individual freedoms to do what each of us want.

My hope is that people start thinking about what their vote will do for everyone. I know that this will never happen because we keep circling the drain. This election, I hope we do end up with some "vote all incumbents out" going on, but I fear that people are going to be doing this the wrong way. Most people still pay way too much attention to political ads. He said/she said gets us nowhere.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/28/10 4:39 p.m.
Cone_Junky wrote: Doesn't matter how the percentage relates to general population. When 60% of Republicans relabeld as "tea partyers" are dependent on the social welfare they despise so much. Hypocrits.

95% of statistics are fabricated out of thin air.

Seriously, I don't believe you can even begin to show any single component of that statement (or it's implications) is CLOSE to true.

Tea party advocates are mostly Republican? Nope.

Tea party advocates are relabeled Republicans? Nope.

60% of Tea Party folks are Republicans? Nope.

Perhaps you meant 60% of the Republicans who align with Tea party collect welfare? Nope.

Those that DO collect benefits from the government are dependent on it as a primary source? Nope.

That they despise welfare? Nope.

That they wouldn't give it up? Nope.

That YOU are not also a Hypocrite? Certainly not.

If you're gonna spew venom, at least blend in a little bit of truth, won't you please? Your point will be received a little bit better if you don't make up all the facts to suit your opinion.

Otto_Maddox
Otto_Maddox Reader
10/28/10 4:46 p.m.

Toyman01
Toyman01 GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
10/28/10 5:08 p.m.

You want reform, start with the campaigning process. Having to weed through the lies, damn lies and BS to find any actual info on a politician is a PITA. How about no statements taken out of context. If a person is quoted, quote the entire paragraph or speech. How about not publishing dirt without verifiable proof and publishing that proof. How about actually stating views, opinions and voting record and leave the mud slinging to the girls in bikinis.

A large part of the electorate is too stupid or too lazy to bother with voting much less actually researching a candidate. Hence they pull the lever for the guy who's name they have heard before or had the coolest add. Or "I've always voted Republican/Democrat, I'll just push that button." Anyone that does that is an idiot. If you don't something about a candidate that didn't come from the competitors add, you didn't do your homework. Not only do you fail, we all do.

Until 90+% of the electorate shows up and actually votes, the majority of America hasn't decided anything. Unless that 90+% actually takes an interest and spends the time to know who and what they are voting for we will end up with the same mindless partisan pack of wolves we have always had. It's a sad thing when the citizens of the greatest country ever can't be bothered to even vote. It's even sadder when they then bitch about the outcome.

fast_eddie_72
fast_eddie_72 Reader
10/28/10 5:36 p.m.
SVreX wrote: Tea party advocates are mostly Republican? Nope.

I've done a wonderful job of staying out of this and don't intend to change that now. But I was curious only about this statement. I was under the impression that all the candidates who were backed by the Tea Party were indeed Republican. Is that not the case?

WilberM3
WilberM3 Reader
10/28/10 6:05 p.m.
fast_eddie_72 wrote: I've done a wonderful job of staying out of this and don't intend to change that now. But I was curious only about this statement. I was under the impression that all the candidates who were backed by the Tea Party were indeed Republican. Is that not the case?

as probably the most common thing people who find themselves in the Tea Party Movement stand for is a smaller, less intrusive government, it really isnt so much about blue vs. red ( BOTH parties are in the business of growing government) it's just that the only people who actually still believe in a Constitutionally limited government fall on the [fiscally] conservative side of the republican party (or some practically irrelevant indie party).

fast_eddie_72
fast_eddie_72 Reader
10/28/10 7:34 p.m.
WilberM3 wrote: as probably the most common thing people who find themselves in the Tea Party Movement stand for is a smaller, less intrusive government, it really isnt so much about blue vs. red ( BOTH parties are in the business of growing government) it's just that the only people who actually still believe in a Constitutionally limited government fall on the [fiscally] conservative side of the republican party (or some practically irrelevant indie party).

Yeeeaaahhh, so- "Tea party advocates are mostly Republican. "

I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, I am just confused by the effort to distance the Tea Party from the Republicans. I see it as an effort to re-invent the Republican Party. And for the record, I agree with a lot of the things they say they're for- so if they were to actually create a Republican Party that really did something about the debt, I'd be very happy to see that.

Early on, it was my understanding that the Tea Party people were trying to move the Republicans away from a social conservative agenda. I applauded that. But when I look at the actual candidates they've backed, I have a hard time seeing it.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/28/10 7:41 p.m.
fast_eddie_72 wrote:
SVreX wrote: Tea party advocates are mostly Republican? Nope.
I've done a wonderful job of staying out of this and don't intend to change that now. But I was curious only about this statement. I was under the impression that all the candidates who were backed by the Tea Party were indeed Republican. Is that not the case?

It was a bit rhetorical.

There probably is a statistical correlation. Certainly not all, but probably a big percentage.

The point was he wasn't citing sources. The statements were broad and sweeping and stated as fact without any actual facts, just opinions.

Since there is no actual "Tea Party" (it's a movement, not a political party), candidates would HAVE to run as something. Since the core foundational perspective of Tea Party supporters is that government has run amuck and total revision is necessary, it would be pretty hard for them to support a Democratic position, since they are the party in power. The choice would be Republican or Independent. Independent is frequently the kiss of death (without party affiliation), so it would not shock me that many choose Republican.

I was referring to Tea Party advocates. You responded referring to candidates.

Among advocates, it would be factually incorrect to label them all as Republicans. Some are independents, and there are in fact some who are Democrats. Also Constitution Party, Green Party, or whatever other flavor you like.

The original poster was painting "Tea Partyers" (sic) as renegade Republicans. Hypocritical turncoats who had voted against his party in the election, and now were not prepared to allow the duly elected position to run its course. That is a false impression.

fast_eddie_72
fast_eddie_72 Reader
10/28/10 7:47 p.m.
SVreX wrote: Some are independents, and there are in fact some who are Democrats.

Okay, I do get your point. But hang on. Now you aren't citing sources. Democrats in the Tea Party? No doubt you could find some anecdotally. But I'd wager you'd have a hard time substantiating that claim in any significant manner.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/28/10 7:49 p.m.
fast_eddie_72 wrote: I see it as an effort to re-invent the Republican Party.

On it's good days, I see it as a movement to return to logic and fiscal responsibility. At the moment that would mean a move toward the conservative, because the pendulum is pretty far Left right now.

Logic and fiscal responsibility would exclude the Republican Party as well.

On it's bad days, it is an ill-informed emotionally driven sound byte machine more concerned with winning an argument or personal recognition than making the country any better. On those days, It's Repub Lite.

fast_eddie_72
fast_eddie_72 Reader
10/28/10 7:52 p.m.

Thanks for the reasoned response to my question!

I now return to lurker mode on this thread. I am fascinated by the Tea Party movement and hope it ultimately brings some focus on sound financial policy. We'll see.

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/28/10 7:55 p.m.

Does Harry Reid count?

Harry Reid supports Tea Party candidate

Granted, his motives are totally screwed, and he certainly does not represent the ideas of the Tea Party, but Harry Reid IS supporting a Tea Party candidate.

Before you say it, I know that does not make him a Tea Party advocate. It makes him a supporter of a Tea Party candidate (for his own Democratic political self-interest purposes).

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/28/10 7:57 p.m.
fast_eddie_72 wrote: Thanks for the reasoned response to my question! I now return to lurker mode on this thread. I am fascinated by the Tea Party movement and hope it ultimately brings some focus on sound financial policy. We'll see.

On that we can most certainly agree.

I am thrilled to see a large number of people actually talking about sound fiscal policy. I stand with you hoping to see some positive results.

I'm just not as good at keeping my mouth shut as you are, so I make a E36 M3ty lurker!

SVreX
SVreX SuperDork
10/28/10 7:58 p.m.

Oh, and thanks for your well reasoned questions and commentary as well.

1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 23
Our Preferred Partners
bVjfXRUDtYXNN9RPhOkv3mX2Bw5ESN4k7dAP63xYmbWPFLpfCuyiWNidWH7lu0xu