apparently Johnson, you are a Democrat and I would never try to change anyone's beliefs in anything. Just remember how bad a job Obama is doing!!

Actually, i am just opposed to un-founded hot air and scare tactics.
it isnt about team politics with me.

It may help you to think of me as one of those evil liberals who are ruining america, but i guarantee you that i vote where i see competence. It doesn't matter what party they represent.

i have no beliefs, as i think you intend that word. I do have confidence that a return to bush-era government is a terrible plan, as has been demonstrated by the precipitous decline of americas health and well being the last time we used it.

it doesn't take my belief or disbelief or indifference for what you said to be ridiculous. Nor is it a party affiliation thing. And by the way, when asked i always list as independent.

Please explain (here's the important part) with concrete examples, how Obama is doing such a terrible job.

johnson1010 wrote:Actually, i am just opposed to un-founded hot air and scare tactics.
it isnt about team politics with me.

It may help you to think of me as one of those evil liberals who are ruining america, but i guarantee you that i vote where i see competence. It doesn't matter what party they represent.

i have no beliefs, as i think you intend that word. I do have confidence that a return to bush-era government is a terrible plan, as has been demonstrated by the precipitous decline of americas health and well being the last time we used it.

it doesn't take my belief or disbelief or indifference for what you said to be ridiculous. Nor is it a party affiliation thing. And by the way, when asked i always list as independent.

Please explain (here's the important part) with concrete examples, how Obama is doing such a terrible job.

For those of you who doubted Barney Frank's duplicity in the Fannie and Freddie fiasco, he recently admitted that he was wrong to oppose reform. He claims it was because he doubted the motives of Republicans but look at what Frank said in 2003 and savor the irony.

When US Representative Barney Frank spoke in a packed hearing room on Capitol Hill seven years ago, he did not imagine that his words would eventually haunt a reelection bid.

The issue that day in 2003 was whether mortgage backers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were fiscally strong. Frank declared with his trademark confidence that they were, accusing critics and regulators of exaggerating threats to Fannie’s and Freddie’s financial integrity. And, the Massachusetts Democrat maintained, “even if there were problems, the federal government doesn’t bail them out.”
Now, it’s clear he was wrong on both points…


Here’s the thing. Frank wasn’t wrong. He was lying.



judicialwatch.org/weeklyupdate/2010/42- ... dmits-lies

One more thing, the Tea Party opposes Earmarks.

What in the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to take money from one state to spend in another? It is one thing for disasters, emergencies, public health, etc. but otherwise, it is just pimping.

What in the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to take money from one state to spend in another? It is one thing for disasters, emergencies, public health, etc. but otherwise, it is just pimping.

I believe that if there is a state in the union that has a larger abundance of money, why shouldn't that state help other fellow Americans in their states where their cash flow is almost in the negative numbers; take California for example. I do not believe it is called pimping. so what you are saying is it's okay to send money overseas to help other countries in need
but it's not okay to help states in this country that are in need? Think about that one!

Every state is in financial trouble. California is considered almost bankrupt. How did this happen? California is on the cutting edge of public policy and law making and the state is very proud of this. Legislating environmental bills costs big bucks! The flip flopping in regard to the gay marriage issue in CA cost what, millions? And it’s not over, the governor of CA is against gay marriage, and he will find money to overturn this bill again. For years CA has been considered the leader in the country in passing progressive environmental and social bills and laws and they pay dearly for this status. Why should NJ help CA keep this status and help a governor who is a retard when it comes to social issues and the legislation it produces?

phillies4evr wrote:

What in the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to take money from one state to spend in another? It is one thing for disasters, emergencies, public health, etc. but otherwise, it is just pimping.[/quote

I believe that if there is a state in the union that has a larger abundance of money, why shouldn't that state help other fellow Americans in their states where their cash flow is almost in the negative numbers; take California for example. I do not believe it is called pimping. so what you are saying is it's okay to send money overseas to help other countries in need
but it's not okay to help states in this country that are in need? Think about that one!

What's the difference between that and redistribution of wealth between people?
As for foreign aid, ideally that should be for countries which need help with education, and health issues, and for defense for our allies. Federal money to states comes with strings and is boondoggle and a very inefficient way of funding projects. But my main point is stop the Earmarks. If a particular state needs federal funding for something bring it to the floor for a debate and let everyone vote openly on it, don't hide it in some unrelated bill.

okay, I do agree that there should be a vote that everyone agrees upon as to which states need financial help the most. This issue should not be kept hidden-- the citizens of this country have a right to know about it and why that particular state or states need the money and what it is to be used for.

Suzanne...... I just read your last post. What I meant to say in my last post was that financial help should be given to states for things such as destruction from storms, horrible unemployment due to the mess this country is in and to make sure that those who have lost their homes are at least able to have some money to find shelter until things turn around. I do agree that California has wasted way too much money but thank God the Schwarzenegger regime is coming to an end.

It is inconceivable to me that people are backing this "movement." First of all, every single candidate or standard bearer of the Tea Party needs to read, review and understand the Constitution. They also need to realize that, inspite of what Sharon Angle says, the Constitution does not violate the first Commandment. That statemend demonstrates a philosophy so steeped in theocracy that EVERYONE should be running away full speed from all of these people. But that's just one of the many problems associated with them.

The concern about Federal spending, while legitimate as to how much is spent, places way too much blame on the current administration and fails to adequately address what came before. It supposes that Barack Obama "created" the current condition. That's just ridiculous to anyone who has been paying attention for the last 10 years. The idea of cutting ALL federal programs like social security, medicaire, unemployment, VA Hospitals, Education department, mortgage interest deductions and a myriad of programs that have served this country well is nonsense. All of this while crying over a tax deduction for the uber wealthy, one that virtually nobody in the tea party can claim anyway, and the increase in the federal deficit that will bring.

The idea that the stated goal of the Tea Party and the republicans who don't have the balls to stand up to them is to "make President Obama fail." No compromise with the democrats on any issue. Think about that. Two more years of obstruction by the republican party. Is THAT what you voted for if you voted for them? This country is built on compromise and cooperation. Not obstruction at any cost. Not on building the gap between wealthy and poverty.

These people who scream that they wan their country back. Back from WHOM? It's my country as much as theirs, and the implication that I'm not an American is starting to piss me off. No Federal government? No taxation without representation? Are these people stupid? They are VOTING for representation. They HAVE representation. They don't even understand the issue or what the phrase means. And if they are to defeat all Federal spending, do they think the states they live in are going to "give" them anything they need without taxes being paid? Taxes ARE inevitable. It's just a question of to whom they are paid. Substituting one tax man with another doesn't get rid of taxes. And it is a safe bet that if the states are left to create programs like transportation, education, electric grids and the like without Federal "intervention" or funding, things will get very expensive. And the interstate compacts that would be required would be an extreme nightmare.

Because Tea Baggers, if you want the Federal Government out of your life, it should be COMPLETELY out. You can't pick and choose the programs or subsidies that suit your needs. You can't take unemployment for a year then claim it's socialism the next. You can't have your highways and infrastructure subsidized by the Federal government then overthrow it the year after. You can't have the FAA land your planes, the FDA monitor the saftey of food and drugs, the CDC alert you of health hazards and the FTC protect you from fraud if you want the Federal government to stop bothering you. It's all or nothing. Personally, I'd LOVE to see all of you get your wish. A big portion of the country that becomes YOUR country. Exclusive of all Federal interventionn and aid. I'd vote for that in a heartbeat. And I'm sure not many of you would.

toodeemo wrote:It is inconceivable to me that people are backing this "movement." First of all, every single candidate or standard bearer of the Tea Party needs to read, review and understand the Constitution. They also need to realize that, inspite of what Sharon Angle says, the Constitution does not violate the first Commandment. That statemend demonstrates a philosophy so steeped in theocracy that EVERYONE should be running away full speed from all of these people. But that's just one of the many problems associated with them.

The concern about Federal spending, while legitimate as to how much is spent, places way too much blame on the current administration and fails to adequately address what came before. It supposes that Barack Obama "created" the current condition. That's just ridiculous to anyone who has been paying attention for the last 10 years. The idea of cutting ALL federal programs like social security, medicaire, unemployment, VA Hospitals, Education department, mortgage interest deductions and a myriad of programs that have served this country well is nonsense. All of this while crying over a tax deduction for the uber wealthy, one that virtually nobody in the tea party can claim anyway, and the increase in the federal deficit that will bring.

The idea that the stated goal of the Tea Party and the republicans who don't have the balls to stand up to them is to "make President Obama fail." No compromise with the democrats on any issue. Think about that. Two more years of obstruction by the republican party. Is THAT what you voted for if you voted for them? This country is built on compromise and cooperation. Not obstruction at any cost. Not on building the gap between wealthy and poverty.

These people who scream that they wan their country back. Back from WHOM? It's my country as much as theirs, and the implication that I'm not an American is starting to piss me off. No Federal government? No taxation without representation? Are these people stupid? They are VOTING for representation. They HAVE representation. They don't even understand the issue or what the phrase means. And if they are to defeat all Federal spending, do they think the states they live in are going to "give" them anything they need without taxes being paid? Taxes ARE inevitable. It's just a question of to whom they are paid. Substituting one tax man with another doesn't get rid of taxes. And it is a safe bet that if the states are left to create programs like transportation, education, electric grids and the like without Federal "intervention" or funding, things will get very expensive. And the interstate compacts that would be required would be an extreme nightmare.

Because Tea Baggers, if you want the Federal Government out of your life, it should be COMPLETELY out. You can't pick and choose the programs or subsidies that suit your needs. You can't take unemployment for a year then claim it's socialism the next. You can't have your highways and infrastructure subsidized by the Federal government then overthrow it the year after. You can't have the FAA land your planes, the FDA monitor the saftey of food and drugs, the CDC alert you of health hazards and the FTC protect you from fraud if you want the Federal government to stop bothering you. It's all or nothing. Personally, I'd LOVE to see all of you get your wish. A big portion of the country that becomes YOUR country. Exclusive of all Federal interventionn and aid. I'd vote for that in a heartbeat. And I'm sure not many of you would.

Not everyone is running from the Tea Party candidates, in fact in many cases the inexperience of them is exactly what is attractive about them and what the Forefathers invisioned as representatives for our country. The way it is now, we have a professional legislature whose job is to constantly run for office instead of dealing with the issues facing us.

Additionally, many of our elected officials engage regularly in practices which would get them arrested if they were in business. Take social security, contributions are supposed to be used by the SSA to pay benefits and there should be a surplus of money collected vs paid. But congress for years has spent the surplus and replaced it with IOUs. Now that we are in an economic mess and SS is running low on funds that money needs to be replaced. Problem is, there isn't any money to replace it with because of our huge deficits. That means benefits wll have to be cut, or replacement money borrowed, or taxes increased, or the debt will have to be monetarized [print more money]. Any way you slice it we are going to end up putting the money in twice.

As for slashing the budget 10%, I guarantee you that 10% can be achieved through efficiency and even if it can't be, there is no choice. Cut 10% now or 100% tomorrow. Don't believe me, just ask Britain who are no making even bigger cuts, or Greece, or France?

Ok, so Obama got handed a bad economy, but deficits went from Billions to Trillions with him and the Tea Party movement has said enough. We are not going to permit that any more.

So some Tea Party candidates have said some stupid things? Obama talked about campaigning in all 57 states.

Don't like the Tea Party? Keep the liberal in charge. Within a few years us Senior Citizens will be sucking every dollar you make out of your pockets for our retirement and health care.