U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-13-2010, 02:51 PM
 
6,021 posts, read 5,629,021 times
Reputation: 1871

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
Well this is my primary beef with the Campaign for Liberty and the Ron Paul wing of the Tea Party. At one time they were focused far more on how the cost of empire and war effect our economic well being. However, over the past years, the focus has been primarily on health care and similar debates. While I dislike the massive spending in general, my first concerns are our wars, empire and interventionist foreign policy that sucks the life out of our economy.

So on this, I'm very disappointed with Ron Paul's efforts on the subject, and while I still donate a couple of bucks now and again, if I don't hear more of his 2008 positions, I'm likely to end my support. While there have always been things I've disagreed with Ron Paul on, those things in which we did agree were the root of my support, so if they are no longer a key component, then whats the point?
Here is a link to Ron Paul talking about health care in the US, here.

The thing about his position on health care and getting gubmint out of it is that he and many others leave out a few very important facts.

Insurance companies have Uncle Sam's a okay to remain largely private, for profit, unregulated entities.

Their anti-trust exemptions give them monopolistic/oligopolistic market domination.

I'm not sure whether Big Pharma and the medical device industry also have that de jure status, but they do seem to have it de facto.

And damn near everytime I bring up the anti-trust exemption to the "get the gubmint out my life" types, their brain suffers a meltdown because they haven't received that history lesson yet from the magical chalkboard.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-13-2010, 05:56 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 13,701,258 times
Reputation: 3691
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
Here is a link to Ron Paul talking about health care in the US, here.

The thing about his position on health care and getting gubmint out of it is that he and many others leave out a few very important facts.

Insurance companies have Uncle Sam's a okay to remain largely private, for profit, unregulated entities.

Their anti-trust exemptions give them monopolistic/oligopolistic market domination.

I'm not sure whether Big Pharma and the medical device industry also have that de jure status, but they do seem to have it de facto.

And damn near everytime I bring up the anti-trust exemption to the "get the gubmint out my life" types, their brain suffers a meltdown because they haven't received that history lesson yet from the magical chalkboard.
Well beyond Ron Paul and the very small minority of anti-war conservatives that exist today, I'm beginning think the Tea Party is just too saturated by the corporately funded War Party that has co-opted Ron Paul's brand of Tea Party.

Too bad so many fearful cowards so promoting wars don't actually have the courage of their convictions to go fight them. The 100 million man army of armchair warriors against terror from their secret bases in suburban living rooms, just waiting to ride their Medicare paid for hover-round to the next Beck army gathering round the ole chalkboard.

I suppose there will always be those who adjoin with the Tea Party who are truly concerned about the spending habits of government, but anymore it appears more that most just want to whine and cry about spending for the sake of whining and crying in the fetal position from under their beds.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 01:57 PM
 
6,021 posts, read 5,629,021 times
Reputation: 1871
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
Well beyond Ron Paul and the very small minority of anti-war conservatives that exist today, I'm beginning think the Tea Party is just too saturated by the corporately funded War Party that has co-opted Ron Paul's brand of Tea Party.

Too bad so many fearful cowards so promoting wars don't actually have the courage of their convictions to go fight them. The 100 million man army of armchair warriors against terror from their secret bases in suburban living rooms, just waiting to ride their Medicare paid for hover-round to the next Beck army gathering round the ole chalkboard.

I suppose there will always be those who adjoin with the Tea Party who are truly concerned about the spending habits of government, but anymore it appears more that most just want to whine and cry about spending for the sake of whining and crying in the fetal position from under their beds.
The only way to end this travesty is to have actual conservatives such as yourself, Paul, the MCcains (Meghan seems to have a good head on her shoulder), Barlett and others show the world that believing in magical chalkboards does not make one a conservative.

I truly hope we can ditch the Rupert party and once again have a proud, strong, noble Republican party.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 08:02 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 13,701,258 times
Reputation: 3691
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
The only way to end this travesty is to have actual conservatives such as yourself, Paul, the MCcains (Meghan seems to have a good head on her shoulder), Barlett and others show the world that believing in magical chalkboards does not make one a conservative.

I truly hope we can ditch the Rupert party and once again have a proud, strong, noble Republican party.
Well I don't identify with any political party, and while I certainly may agree with a traditional conservative approach to a fair number of issues, the party long since left the Teddy Roosevelt's and even William Buckely's behind to rot under a pile of sensationalist driven fear and gross fantasy some time ago.

Besides, in order to join the contemporary Republican Party, I'd have to live in fear, hide under my bed in the fetal position while I recite the top ten things the Party told me to either fear or hate. Since I'm not a fearful person, an obedient conformist or a war mongering coward and don't feel like sharing the underside of my bed with the cat, I'll just remain top side where the air is a bit less stale.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 08:05 PM
 
2,564 posts, read 1,520,931 times
Reputation: 347
Teabaggers are warmongers "incognito"
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 10:29 PM
 
1,290 posts, read 2,468,107 times
Reputation: 686
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspiesmom View Post
Teabaggers are warmongers "incognito"

....and therefore similar to your current bankster puppet-in-chief. Troll along elswhere please and leave grown up discussions to the grown ups.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2010, 08:13 AM
 
11,135 posts, read 13,701,258 times
Reputation: 3691
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspiesmom View Post
Teabaggers are warmongers "incognito"
Actually I'd consider most Liberals to be warmonger "incognito", as I vividly remember droves of the liberal anti-war left in 2006, but once Obama was elected, they all but vanished. Sure there are still some out protesting our adventures in the Middle East, but most rationalized Afghanistan as the "good war", or at least bought into the sound bytes rationalizing it. Of those left that still rail against it, their voices are but a mere muted blurb and I understand that they don't want to be too critical of their guy in office for fear of what could happen. However, it is my opinion that many of the anti-war liberal left weren't so much as opposed to the war as they were opposed to Bush prosecuting the war.

One thing both left and right in this country share is their hypocrisy. Most of the contemporary GOP claim to be fiscal conservatives which is an utter joke because they are about as fiscally responsible as a sex crazed gambling addict with a winning scratch off ticket in the waiting room of a Nevada house of prostitution. The bulk of the left seem to have no problem turning a blind eye to the humanitarian atrocities due to wars of choice, in favor of scoring political points.

I wash my hands of both.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2010, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
33,395 posts, read 18,803,780 times
Reputation: 11373
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
One of the primary themes of the Tea Party folks is deficit spending, in fact government spending in general. a national debt nearing 100 percent of gross domestic product and a deficit of 10 percent of GDP. As to the cause of the deficit that could precipitate a run on the dollar, double-digit inflation, even a default, the Tea Party and GOP also agree — federal spending that consumes 25 percent of GDP. Both are also on the same page in their opposition to closing the deficit with new or higher taxes.[1] Not to mention the interest on the debt that must be paid or risk default, so the money has to come from somewhere.

There are two major sources of where this money is to be found, one being in social services, VA benefits, Medicare, Medicaid, education, Social Security and all the traditional areas where Democrats support. The other place to look for some cash is our military apparatus and costs to defend our empire.

Now here is where we will see just how principled the Tea Party movement really is.
{snip}
I rather enjoyed that the American Conservative agrees with me that there is a distinction between national defense and defense of the empire. I mean we are still defending Europe from an enemy that collapsed 20 years ago. Even President Eisenhower told John F. Kennedy to bring the troops home from Europe and surely Eisenhower wasn't a closet isolationist.
Cutting our armed forces from most foreign countries works for me.

If Europe wants to defend Europe, or some of their allies, from aggressive nations, let them foot the bill and get their hands dirty. I'm tires of the US basically subsidizing the national defense of foreign countries by supplying part of their national defense, so they can thumb their nose at us because they can maintain more social services for their citizens.

Quote:
We won't even bother discussing the 11 new 13.8 billion a piece aircraft carries the Navy wants, let alone the pet projects of the Airforce, Marines and Army.
But the "billion" is the new "million" in the era of 0bama, so those ships are only $14 million a piece, and that ain't much.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2010, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
33,395 posts, read 18,803,780 times
Reputation: 11373
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspiesmom View Post
Teabaggers are warmongers "incognito"
But not the democrats, right?

WWI
WWII
Korea
Vietnam
...and all the many armed conflicts that president Clinton got us into.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2010, 09:12 AM
 
11,135 posts, read 13,701,258 times
Reputation: 3691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Cutting our armed forces from most foreign countries works for me.

If Europe wants to defend Europe, or some of their allies, from aggressive nations, let them foot the bill and get their hands dirty. I'm tires of the US basically subsidizing the national defense of foreign countries by supplying part of their national defense, so they can thumb their nose at us because they can maintain more social services for their citizens.

But the "billion" is the new "million" in the era of 0bama, so those ships are only $14 million a piece, and that ain't much.
Heck, even Ike told JFK it would be a good idea to get our troops out of Europe, and yes, I'm totally against our military defending Europe against a threat that collapsed 20 years ago.

Well perhaps we need all those new carriers to defend against the Al Qaeda navy running rampant in the North Sea and off the coast of Hawaii. Few billion here, few billion there, few billion in cost over runs and pretty soon you are talking real money.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:37 AM.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top