Romney keeps away from Tea Party

[Janice]

Gaze into your crystal balls all you want,  its too soon to place all your chips on any marker yet.

[JohnnyReb]

I read an article several years back that said "White males determine an election." They're 20% of the voting public and as the national elections go whichever way they lean.....SO, which way are the white males leaning right now?....or in the future?

[TexasCop]

The problem with "independent" voters (not those who have strong views one way or the other, but those who don't have any either way) is that they're fickle and deliberately choose not to educate themselves on political matters.

Bingo.  I believe it was Hannity who nailed it when he called them, "Intellectually Lazy".  It may have been Levin.  Been a while since I heard it, but it's a perfect description.

[NHSparky]

Drinking the Tea will be a hinderance in the general election.  You will not be able to embrace them and win.

Say what you will about the TP and Palin, but 3/4 of the candidates backed by one or both won last November.  You wish to focus on Sharon Angle and Christine O'Donnell?  Fine.  That's like focusing on a dripping sink on the Titanic right after it hit the iceberg.

[NHSparky]

I'm sorry, but Bok is correct.  While the Tea Party is popular among the majority of conservatives, it's very unpopular with other voting blocs, namely the coveted independents and certainly the left leaning moderates.  The biggest glaring examples of this were with Christine O'Donnell and Joe Miller.  Both were propelled into candidacy by the Tea Party, but they were soundly rejected by the rest of the voting public.  The 2008 election showed us just how badly we need moderate voters.

Disagree.  Reagan was vilified in the press as an "extremist", "too conservative", etc., yet he won the presidency in 1980 by 10 points (and that's with John Anderson, a former Republican, in the race drawing votes that almost certainly would have broken solidly to Reagan) and in 1984 by 18 points, nearly completing an EC sweep (and would have had he not lost Minnesota by a bare 3500 votes.)

The only thing the "mushy middle" is good for is gauging the effectiveness of the MSM/DNC propaganda machine.

[NHSparky]

Some conservatives are extremely far right with their views on fiscal responsibility (Palin).  Other conservatives are extremely far right with their views on social issues (Bush Jr.)  Then you have conservatives who are a mix of the two (me).  I'm not a fan of the extreme ends of either type of conservative.  
 
I consider myself to be a moderate Republican.  I am a Christian and believe that God shouldn't be removed from schools, but I also believe that the bible shouldn't guide official White House policy.  I believe in fiscal philosophies such as a flat tax (progressive taxation drives me nuts because of how unfair it is) and that government should cut spending, but I also believe that sometimes taxes have to be raised in order to sustain programs that are important to us.

How about cutting spending FIRST and keep taxes where they are?  The highest corporate tax rate in the world not enough for ya?

[TexasCop]

Cutting spending should be a given.  I think it's obvious that we can't sustain our budget at current rates.  I believe that we're going to have to dig deep into social programs.  Trust me, I see in my line of work that welfare is more of a profession than it is actual assistance.  People live off the public dole and will adjust their lifestyles to ensure that the free money flows indefinitely.  They think it's free money when it's not....it's yours and mine.

[TexasCop]

I don't think we can overcome our deficit with tax rates staying the way they are.  However, I'm not saying continue to squeeze the 50% of us who actually do pay taxes.  How about we eliminate all the tax breaks and exemptions that the non-paying 50% have and go to a simple flat tax where we all pay the same?  Adjust that flat rate to a range where we could pay off this deficit in 10 years. 

[Lacarnut]

Some conservatives are extremely far right with their views on fiscal responsibility (Palin).  Other conservatives are extremely far right with their views on social issues (Bush Jr.)  Then you have conservatives who are a mix of the two (me).  I'm not a fan of the extreme ends of either type of conservative. 
 
I consider myself to be a moderate Republican.  I am a Christian and believe that God shouldn't be removed from schools, but I also believe that the bible shouldn't guide official White House policy.  I believe in fiscal philosophies such as a flat tax (progressive taxation drives me nuts because of how unfair it is) and that government should cut spending, but I also believe that sometimes taxes have to be raised in order to sustain programs that are important to us.

Sounds like to me that you are a liberal Republician. Taxes do not need to be raised. Kennedy and Reagan proved that. What we need is more taxpayers and fewer dead beats on the welfare rolls.

Specify the far right views of fiscal responsibility that Palin supports. Let's hear it. I think you are blowing smoke. The same can be said for Bush on social issues. I guess you like queers in the military and are in favor of gay marriage. Let's hear specifics rather than generalities of Palin and Bush extremely right wing views. Are you a troll cause I hear a lot of bullshit coming from you?. 

[TexasCop]

Sounds like to me that you are a liberal Republician. Taxes do not need to be raised. Kennedy and Reagan proved that. What we need is more taxpayers and fewer dead beats on the welfare rolls.

Specify the far right views of fiscal responsibility that Palin supports. Let's hear it. I think you are blowing smoke. The same can be said for Bush on social issues. I guess you like queers in the military and are in favor of gay marriage. Let's hear specifics rather than generalities of Palin and Bush extremely right wing views. Are you a troll cause I hear a lot of bullshit coming from you?. 

Well, you'll just have to read about it in other threads and posts because I don't entertain the desires for conflict from internet tough guys.

[Lacarnut]

Well, you'll just have to read about it in other threads and posts because I don't entertain the desires for conflict from internet tough guys.

I get it; a wimpy troll that is afraid to discuss facts rather than opinions. I don't think you are a cop either.

[TexasCop]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough for you.
 
I'm not playing your game.  Have a nice day.

[DixieBelle]

I get it; a wimpy troll that is afraid to discuss facts rather than opinions. I don't think you are a cop either.

Not cool. Can't we give the guy the benefit of the doubt?

[Lacarnut]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough for you.
 
I'm not playing your game.  Have a nice day.

I have been on internet boards for around 8 years and this is a first being called an internet tough guy and coming from a newbie fraud. WOW.

[DixieBelle]

ENOUGH!!! Until you have facts proving otherwise, new members WILL NOT be treated this way!!! Knock. it. off.

Texascop can handle himself and if the two of you want to duke it out about politics, have at it. But we will NOT discount someone simply for being a Newbie.

This crap ends here.

[TexasCop]

Not cool. Can't we give the guy the benefit of the doubt?

I don't mind.  I understand the paranoia of liberal infiltrators.  I think it's smart to be that way.  But if someone has a question for me, I'll be happy to clarify my beliefs to them.....so long as they don't come across as a tool when they do so.  

[DixieBelle]

Carry on with the debate guys. Just stick to the facts and follow the forum rules. TC when your post count is 100, you will be able to see The Fight Club Forum. That's the no-holds barred section people can invite each other to when it's clear you need to vent your spleen somewhere besides the regular boards.

[TexasCop]

LOL, okay.

[TexasCop]

Lacarnut,
 
When I talk about taxation, I'm saying that we are so far in a fiscal hole, I don't see how we can get out without raising taxes.  I don't want to pay more taxes (especially with the rate of inflation and the fact that I'm not getting pay raises), you don't want to pay more taxes, but are cuts in spending going to be enough?  I just don't see how it could happen, but I'm not a CPA.
 
Yes, we do need more taxpayers and less dead beats on the welfare rolls.  I firmly believe in giving people a hand-up instead of a hand-out.  We need an end game for public assistance.  People living their lives on welfare rolls is unacceptible.  Instead of funding their $3,000 rims on their Escalades, why don't we help fund job training for them?  If they drop out or fail beyond that point, sorry, but you're on your own.

Palin wants the government to consume itself.  I understand that to a degree, but you have to understand that services will suffer.  I have a vision of interstates with pot holes, even longer lines at the Social Security office, impossible waits at the VA hospitals, etc.  I would rather raise taxes to keep important government programs than cut them and use those cuts to erase our deficit.
 
As for gays in the military, I'm sorry to tell you, but they've always been there.  I served and I knew who they were.  You know what?  They didn't bother me.  They mostly only seem to bother people who never served.  May I ask what branch you served in?

[TexasCop]

I'm headed to the gym, but I'll be happy to answer any further questions you have when I get back.  I'm not the enemy, man.

[Janice]

Lacarnut,
 
When I talk about taxation, I'm saying that we are so far in a fiscal hole, I don't see how we can get out without raising taxes.  I don't want to pay more taxes (especially with the rate of inflation and the fact that I'm not getting pay raises), you don't want to pay more taxes, but are cuts in spending going to be enough?  I just don't see how it could happen, but I'm not a CPA.

Im no expert either. But we are only trillions away from constitutionally allowed govt services. So cutting spending is probably enough itself if you include the elimination of duplicitous services and agencies of which there are untold amounts.

The reason raising taxes is last and least desirable is that anytime you punish activity, no matter what it is ... you get less of it. So when you raise taxes you get less revenue into the treasury. You think the rich and the job creators are going to sit idly by and watch their profit margins go down the bottomless govt pit when they can simply relocate to a friendlier work environment? Back in the Reagan days we worried Japan would buy all of America up. Why? Because our corp tax rates were so low. Any business, anywhere in the world is going to go where the work environs are less hostile to them and more conducive to high productivity. The Japanese left and took their money with them when the rates were jacked up again sky high as they are today. And the same applies down the line to the ordinary consumer. Its not rocket science. It used to be economics 101 before the left turned education into indoctrination and the news media gave up all pretensions of being unbiased.

And yes a flat tax or a fair tax would help our economy and our culture immensely and save a ton of money too. But as long as we have voters who use the TV as their prime source of news, we will have liberal democrat and liberal republicrat voters. And as long as we have democrats (and the sycophant news media) with anything approaching equal footing at the levers of power in govt there will be NO TAX REFORM of this nature. You can bank on that. Because if it ever came to fruition, it would take power out of Washington and return it to the people. And we know that just aint goin to wash. No how, no way, Hosea.

Instead we'll just keep banging the drums about class warfare and raising taxes every chance a liberal newscaster, a liberal politician or a liberal "educator" gets half a chance. Its worked like a charm for them so far. If you tell a lie long enough ... well, you know the rest.

[TexasCop]

What libs are crying for is that class warfare taxation....."wah, raise taxes on the top 2% earners!"  I'm with you, why punish success?  If you aren't a top 2% earner, it's your fault and due to your own life decisions.  I'll never be one and I accept that. 
 
What I have more in mind are taxes that would target (oops, can I use that word?  Blame Palin, not me!) American businesses that outsource jobs to other countries.  For example, GM just invested over $500 million in MEXICO to develop low emission motors.  I'll stop just shy of calling it punitive taxation, but as long as huge employers such as GM create jobs beyond our borders while laying off Americans, we're going to continue chasing our tails. 

[Attero Dominatus]

Lacarnut,
 
When I talk about taxation, I'm saying that we are so far in a fiscal hole, I don't see how we can get out without raising taxes.  I don't want to pay more taxes (especially with the rate of inflation and the fact that I'm not getting pay raises), you don't want to pay more taxes, but are cuts in spending going to be enough?  I just don't see how it could happen, but I'm not a CPA.
 
Yes, we do need more taxpayers and less dead beats on the welfare rolls.  I firmly believe in giving people a hand-up instead of a hand-out.  We need an end game for public assistance.  People living their lives on welfare rolls is unacceptible.  Instead of funding their $3,000 rims on their Escalades, why don't we help fund job training for them?  If they drop out or fail beyond that point, sorry, but you're on your own.

Palin wants the government to consume itself.  I understand that to a degree, but you have to understand that services will suffer.  I have a vision of interstates with pot holes, even longer lines at the Social Security office, impossible waits at the VA hospitals, etc.  I would rather raise taxes to keep important government programs than cut them and use those cuts to erase our deficit.

Raising taxes will drive out the very producers that the state depends upon for revenue. I do agree that the current progressive tax system should be replaced with a flat tax though.

[TexasCop]

Attero, we're already losing those companies. 
 
I'm not gonna pretend to have the right answers.  I vote for the folks who are smart enough to figure it out. 

 

I just wanted to use a bong smilie.

[rich_t]

Lacarnut,
 
When I talk about taxation, I'm saying that we are so far in a fiscal hole, I don't see how we can get out without raising taxes.  I don't want to pay more taxes (especially with the rate of inflation and the fact that I'm not getting pay raises), you don't want to pay more taxes, but are cuts in spending going to be enough?  I just don't see how it could happen, but I'm not a CPA.

How about at least attempting some serious spending reductions before we talk about tax increases?  It has been my experience that the politicians rarely use tax increases for their stated purposes.  Some how the $$$ always seems to get redirected into some BS social program or other.  Do you have any evidence, other than your opinion, that spending cuts alone won't correct the problem?
 

Yes, we do need more taxpayers and less dead beats on the welfare rolls.  I firmly believe in giving people a hand-up instead of a hand-out.  We need an end game for public assistance.  People living their lives on welfare rolls is unacceptible.  Instead of funding their $3,000 rims on their Escalades, why don't we help fund job training for them?  If they drop out or fail beyond that point, sorry, but you're on your own.

5 year life time cap on welfare.  No extra $ for having more kids while on welfare.  Job training IS available for those that qualify in my neck of the woods.  The problem is that far too many folks on welfare don't WANT to work.  Hell, just take a look at all of those content to sit on their asses and draw unemployment for 3 freakin years, rather than work a lower paying job than they are used to.

Palin wants the government to consume itself.

Your proof of this is?

 I understand that to a degree, but you have to understand that services will suffer.

Sevices such as?

 I have a vision of interstates with pot holes,

We already have that.  Highway repair funds are often reallocated by the states.

longer lines at the Social Security office,

 

IMO Social Security should be phased out of existance over the next 20 years.

I would rather raise taxes to keep important government programs than cut them and use those cuts to erase our deficit.

What programs other than the two you just mentioned do you feel are "important"?  Importance is often subjective based on the opinion of the one making the claim.  What you think is important, I may not.
 

As for gays in the military, I'm sorry to tell you, but they've always been there.  I served and I knew who they were.  You know what?  They didn't bother me.  They mostly only seem to bother people who never served.  May I ask what branch you served in?

Yes, they have always been there and in many cases have served honorably.  How much do you think it is going to cost us tax payers when Sgt. Bob wants to add his lover Joe to his US tax $ funded medical care?  BTW,  I served in the Army and I didn't want some peter puffer eyeing my junk.  I still don't.

What branch did you serve in?