How The GOP Plans To Crush The Tea Party Revolt (accuse, abortion)
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.
Let's start with ending the wars, bringing the troops home out of harms way, quit creating an entire new generation of terrorists and use that money for health care here?
I like those agendas. Please say there will be a chicken in every pot.
FYI: I was responding to a poster who wants to abolish both parties. I was just curious what life would be like in America under his "no party system". All he came back with was a copy of the Constitution. Well that's all well and good, but how would the Constitution be applied in real life under a no party system? Give me some specifics.
I've found that for every Article and amendment of the constitution there is a different faction, group, or political party that interprets it in a different way, depending on their agenda. IE: The constitution guarantees the right of a woman to have an abortion but just as many people believe that the constitution guarantees just the opposite. Many people believe that the FED is unconstitutional, while just as many believe that not only is it constitutional but extremely vital to the running of the nation.
I was very curious as to what would be his vision of American life with a no party political system that was run by somebody's interpretation of what the constitution means. I have asked this question many times in this forum over the years and begged for specific answers from these constitutional "Experts".
I like those agendas. Please say there will be a chicken in every pot.
FYI: I was responding to a poster who wants to abolish both parties. I was just curious what life would be like in America under his "no party system". All he came back with was a copy of the Constitution. Well that's all well and good, but how would the Constitution be applied in real life under a no party system? Give me some specifics.
I've found that for every Article and amendment of the constitution there is a different faction, group, or political party that interprets it in a different way, depending on their agenda. IE: The constitution guarantees the right of a woman to have an abortion but just as many people believe that the constitution guarantees just the opposite. Many people believe that the FED is unconstitutional, while just as many believe that not only is it constitutional but extremely vital to the running of the nation.
I was very curious as to what would be his vision of American life with a no party political system that was run by somebody's interpretation of what the constitution means. I have asked this question many times in this forum over the years and begged for specific answers from these constitutional "Experts".
I got nothing but dead air, so far.
Under the Constitution you couldnt ban the two parties so I have no idea what he is saying. Maybe he will better explain.
Absolutely fine. If someone needs replaced they need replaced. I'm not one that will argue to save the party. If you prefer party over principle you are the one that has to live with yourself.
In a 2 party system, I prefer both parties viable. That does mean neither gets every little thing their itty bitty heart desires. I'm fine with that. The ability to compromise is a part of being an adult.
BTW-if you have evidence to the contrary, even if its just a he said she said, I wouldnt mind reading it.
If you have something better then that I definitely wouldnt mind reading it.
We were very smart for once in giving it to him. Does anyone think after all the tragedy that is Syria that Russia will get anything of value out of this mess?
In a 2 party system, I prefer both parties viable. That does mean neither gets every little thing their itty bitty heart desires. I'm fine with that. The ability to compromise is a part of being an adult.
That had nothing at all to do what I said.
The Tea Party helped defeat Robert Bennett. He needed gone. He was one of the highest ranking politicians that was supposed to be overseeing banking when it came crashing down. He failed miserably and should have been defeated.
Luckily there were some like minded Democrats and Dodd saw the writing on the wall and left also. It is far worse that we allowed a Bernanke continue on after being an absolute failure in his job than the Tea Party seeing to it that Bennett lost his.
It's absolutely crazy that anyone would even attempt to try and defend the guy.
Don't we have a representative form of government? Don't we elect politicians to support OUR views? As I have no choice in Nevada, I registered as a Republic instead of the Independent I feel myself to be. But now that the GOP powers-to-be are taking this approach, how can I continue to even remain registered GOP?
I still don't understand the vitriol against the Tea Party. Heck, it's not even a political party. A bunch of common Americans get together to try to voice their views and both the left and right go out of their gourds trying to squash them. Is that was this nation has turned into?
The Republican and Democrat Machine get rich when they get in office. That's why the tea party is a threat to them. You think it has to do with political opinions/sides. I think it has to do with money and how they make it.
Read, "Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets."
Good, the Tea Party is a bat**** crazy invasive species that needs to be culled.
yes. sort of like how the eco-freaks, ELF, and the liberal EPA needs to be culled too.
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.