Tea Party Thread (Reagan, 9/11, terrorist, governor)

[Marlow]

Originally Posted by shorebaby

Paul Krugman doesn't like Republicans! I am shocked! Shocked! Paul Krugman is a partisan hack.

Actually, he's not a partisan hack. He's been very critical of Obama's bailout team and their ideas for bringing back the economy.

[shorebaby]

Originally Posted by Marlow

Actually, he's not a partisan hack. He's been very critical of Obama's bailout team and their ideas for bringing back the economy.

Because the stimulus is not large enough for him. The cheese stands alone.

[shorebaby]

Originally Posted by Upton

Check out the Nobel Prize winning economist putting this teabag nonsense into perspective....here's a taste:


Promoted heavily by Faux News and run by Republicans?...Gee, I hadn't noticed. One thing is for sure, the teabaggers are being laughed at from coast to coast...they're great fun, maybe we should thank them.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/op...13krugman.html

For those in doubt of Krugman's hackery.

Rick Santelli: The Man Who Talked Back - Capital Commerce (usnews.com)

[Philip T]

So let me get this straight.

They want less G spending and less G control?

So are the Tea Party folks for cutting military spending, ending the wars, and reversing the Patriot Act, etc.?

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by shorebaby

Paul Krugman doesn't like Republicans! I am shocked! Shocked! Paul Krugman is a partisan hack.

But so are you, the tea baggers and Faux News. I don't mind seeing self as one either because I do see the people Krugman speaks of, as a joke, and their reasoning/approach, reeking sheer stupidity.

Originally Posted by shorebaby

For those in doubt of Krugman's hackery.

Rick Santelli: The Man Who Talked Back - Capital Commerce (usnews.com)

That Rick Santelli, the joker, who ended up with skid marks moments before appearing in a comedy show knowing that he just might get hammered by a comedian, and pretty badly.

[chicken.or.the.nugget]

Krugman and the New York Times are extremely liberal. He tends to make huge deals out of Republican stories and hides the liberal ones.

[stiffnecked]

Originally Posted by Upton

Check out the Nobel Prize winning economist putting this teabag nonsense into perspective....here's a taste:


Promoted heavily by Faux News and run by Republicans?...Gee, I hadn't noticed. One thing is for sure, the teabaggers are being laughed at from coast to coast...they're great fun, maybe we should thank them.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/op...13krugman.html

Who freaking cares what this guy has to say about squat? Cept you. Do you really think we're all gonna go cower in the corner cause Freddie Kruger wrote something in the paper? Dude you got problems.

[TracySam]

Okay, we will obviusly disagree on national defense, so I don't want to go there in this thread. But in general, we want more accountability on what the government spends out money on; defense, social prgrams, bailouts, etc.

Since the Constitution does assign national defense to the federal government, I'm fine with paying a reasonable amount of taxes for a strong defense. Sometimes that, unfortunately includes going to war. But nowhere in the Constitution does it talk about the goverment taking over private businesses, funding huge bloated social programs, goverment healthcare, and frivolous earmarks.

Most of us realize that our individual opinions on what government should spend money on aren't going to fly for everyone. We know that sometimes our candidate wins, and sometimes the other one does. But we have always relied on our representatives to act according to what the majority of what their constituents/taxpayers want. What has been happening lately is not what most of us want. And the info being published in the media on these big spending bills is either untrue or only partial truth. So taxpayers don't know what their representative is voting on, and the reps themselves don't read what they are voting on.

P.S. The Patriot Act is a whole other discussion. But few people ever wanted it to go on forever. It had an expiration date, with the option to renew. The Libertarian in me doesn't like how it could be stretched and twisted. But the rest of me has to admit that we haven't had another terror attack on our soil since it went into effect.

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by TracySam

Okay, we will obviusly disagree on national defense, so I don't want to go there in this thread. But in general, we want more accountability on what the government spends out money on; defense, social prgrams, bailouts, etc.

Since the Constitution does assign national defense to the federal government, I'm fine with paying a reasonable amount of taxes for a strong defense. Sometimes that, unfortunately includes going to war. But nowhere in the Constitution does it talk about the goverment taking over private businesses, funding huge bloated social programs, goverment healthcare, and frivolous earmarks.

Most of us realize that our individual opinions on what government should spend money on aren't going to fly for everyone. We know that sometimes our candidate wins, and sometimes the other one does. But we have always relied on our representatives to act according to what the majority of what their constituents/taxpayers want. What has been happening lately is not what most of us want. And the info being published in the media on these big spending bills is either untrue or only partial truth. So taxpayers don't know what their representative is voting on, and the reps themselves don't read what they are voting on.

P.S. The Patriot Act is a whole other discussion. But few people ever wanted it to go on forever. It had an expiration date, with the option to renew. The Libertarian in me doesn't like how it could be stretched and twisted. But the rest of me has to admit that we haven't had another terror attack on our soil since it went into effect.

Ookkkaaayyy . . .

'bout what I expected.

Overall sounds fairly phony and gay. (with pardons to homersexuals use of the term)

Which why it is best to keep this political garbage out the Business Section.

Have fun.

[helplessinfl]

Katiana,
To insinuate that these freedom of speech TEA PARTY rallies are anti Obama is very ignorant on your part.
I am sure some attending are...
but me ... I am not.
I hope and pray our President succeeds...
or we are all in for a heck of a ride !