The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Freeper on June 26, 2012, 08:11:46 PM
-
Onlooker (4,316 posts)
This election should be a referendum on the Tea Party, not Obama
Although Blue Dog Democrats were a problem for Obama, the reality is that the direction of our government is in danger of being controlled by the Tea Party. They vote as a block, force the Republican hand, and even stop bipartisan legislation on everything from debt reduction to immigration reform. The Tea Party itself is headed up by racists. Do a search for 'Republican apologizes' in google and you can literally find several dozens instances of Tea Party leaders apologizing for racist, sexist, Islamophobic, and homophobic remarks and emails.
The Tea Party is not only actively involved in disenfranchising American citizens, it's involved harassing Hispanic Americans with its anti-immigration laws that racially profile, targeting women who seek contraception, going after gays who want to get married, replacing scientific thought with Bible stories in schools, gutting services for the most needy, pushing a downward wage spiral by fighting unions and laying off government workers, promoting corruption in politics, even legalizing discrimination. While Americans may not be thrilled with Obama, the fact is that the Tea Party is trying to restore the special rights of the few by returning our nation to the failed policies of the Gilded Age. I think if Americans are forced to choose between Obama and the Democrats or Romney and the Tea Party, the American people will win again as they did in 2008.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/125149443
The American people won in 2008? I'd hate to see what it would be like if we lost. :mental:
-
the Tea Party. They vote as a block, force the Republican hand, and even stop bipartisan legislation on everything from debt reduction to immigration reform.
TEA Party = Taxed Enough Already
They will support deficit reduction that includes cutting spending and NOT raising taxes.
Immigration reform for the left means amnesty and open borders. **** that.
-
Ho Hum! Another angry, paranoid screed from one of the most miserable, useless people on the planet. I can see November from my house!
Cindie
-
TEA Party = Taxed Enough Already
They will support deficit reduction that includes cutting spending and NOT raising taxes.
Immigration reform for the left means amnesty and open borders. **** that.
Now, not only am I not a racist but i am also open to increasing taxes. I am for increasing taxes at a five to one ratio to same year spending cuts. No in the future cuts. 5:1 in each year. Raise taxes 3%, cut spending 15% in that FY. I think that is reasonable seeing as everyone should have some skin in the game.
-
Now, not only am I not a racist but i am also open to increasing taxes. I am for increasing taxes at a five to one ratio to same year spending cuts. No in the future cuts. 5:1 in each year. Raise taxes 3%, cut spending 15% in that FY. I think that is reasonable seeing as everyone should have some skin in the game.
Tax increases across the the board are the only increases I support. That is the only way to get people motivated to make the cuts the are needed.
-
what the turd roller don't get, is that this election is going to be a referendum on both the Tea Party and ABM. And, I know how it's going to come out.
-
In what way does DUmmie Onlooker's premise make any sense at all?
How does DUmmie Onlooker remember to breath? How does DUmmie Onlooker's heart beat?
-
I think Onlooker needs to be reported to the MILF. How dare he/she/it use an unapproved term to describe the Tea Party to whit, "Tea Party". Obvious mole/troll.
-
This election should be a referendum on the Tea Party, not Obama
Yeah, because we added 5 trillion to the debt, we caused high unemployment, a crappy housing market, and increased the number of people on food stamps.
-
Romney was hardly the TEA Party's favorite, and while they will far more likely vote for him than Obamussolini, it won't be the TEA Party that wins or loses it for Mitt. DUmmie Onlooker's thesis is just fundamentally stupid, probably much like the DUmmie him- her- or itself.
-
Tax increases across the the board are the only increases I support. That is the only way to get people motivated to make the cuts the are needed.
If you want to see REAL tax reform, eliminate "withholding".
Give the workers their full paycheck, then hand them a piece of paper with what they owe in taxes and deductions, and where to send the check(s).
For "quicker" tax reform, do it about 1-2 months before an election.
Unfortunately, there isn't a dim politician with enough hair on their balls to do it, even the "wymen".
-
Yeah, because we added 5 trillion to the debt, we caused high unemployment, a crappy housing market, and increased the number of people on food stamps.
It's all Boooosh's fault.
-
TEA Party = Taxed Enough Already
That's why we should make sure it's Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan. I like Rubio, he would be a great VP. But Ryan gets the problem, and would really help Romney and the Republicans propose a budget plan that will cut the deficit, cut taxes and reform public spending.
-
It still amazes me (but doesn't shock), that they know so little of their opposition. I've been involved with the TEA party from the beginning. Never a single word is uttered at gatherings and meetings about The Gheys, Islam, contraception, or bible stories in schools replacing science. In fact, we'd all like a lot MORE science taught in schools, rather than "self-esteem." Crack a math book while you're at it.
It's all about the taxes and the stupid spending.
fighting unions and laying off government workers
Hey DUmbass. Your unions are doing that. They refuse to budge on the benefits, so the ones lowest on the totem pole are given the boot. (Look to WI, where the schools adopting Walker's plan had no layoffs).
We are at a point in NY, where the pensions eat up 50% of the budget in some towns. So, this leads to a lack of basic "government services." Which in the case of a couple of days ago, of a guy getting into an accident and laying in the ditch, unhelped, for an hour. We can't afford a huge army of first responders, because of all the 40-year-old retirees, so we rely on volunteers. You would think with these taxes, we'd have gold-plated services. We don't.
-
Now, not only am I not a racist but i am also open to increasing taxes. I am for increasing taxes at a five to one ratio to same year spending cuts. No in the future cuts. 5:1 in each year. Raise taxes 3%, cut spending 15% in that FY. I think that is reasonable seeing as everyone should have some skin in the game.
I'm not open to anything of the kind, myself.
Jeeze, just cut tax rates across the board, especially the corporate tax rate, in addition to slashing spending and borrowing. We all know this works. We do not need any tax increases, we need tax cuts! Every dollar subtracted from the private economy is one dollar less that can go to capital investment, hiring, and pay raises.
Then Washington will be awash in revenue, anyway, and we all know that, too. Hence we also need at least a statute pegging fed government spending to no more than 18% GDP. Romney is no Calvin Coolidge.
Granted a statute can be repealed by future Congresses--it's not a Constitutional amendment--but once it was in effect there might be very little political will to ever repeal it. Unlike Obamacare, such a statute is likely to be EXTRAORDINARILY popular. Among at least 2/3 of independents as well.
I can't find the poll now, it was a recent one, but it had four choices for what you want the feds to do: cut taxes, reduce the debt, reduce unemployment...I'm sorry I can't remember the fourth. But here's the thing: reducing unemployment and cutting tax rates are one and the same, or rather, one is a precondition to the other. You can't have the first without the second. And I remember that if you added up thsoe percentages they exceeded those who responded "reduce the debt."
-
Tax increases across the the board are the only increases I support. That is the only way to get people motivated to make the cuts the are needed.
Of course across the board. I would also eliminate the EIC credit because it a drag on social security funding. I'm just saying that for each dollar of increased taxes I want five dollars in spending cuts as compromise but now you guys have convinced me it should be 10:1.
-
Of course across the board. I would also eliminate the EIC credit because it a drag on social security funding. I'm just saying that for each dollar of increased taxes I want five dollars in spending cuts as compromise but now you guys have convinced me it should be 10:1.
10;1 is the minimum.