Anyone out there willing to admit being a tea party member & Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am. It makes sense to me that handouts should not be permanent because they become a way of life - too easy, people feel entitled and forget how to work. They are too divorced from the struggle. It also reflects badly on government, because it shows a lack of trust in people to help shape their own lives. Hand ups, not hand outs, are best.

I see that the larger government becomes, the less efficient it is. Also, running a country as large as the USA, there needs to proper delegation, which is what the Constitution iis designed to do. Anything not in there falls to the state and local governments. This is by design. Look at any well-run company and you will see this type of delegation in action.

Spread the wealth sounds good, but you can't do that through legislation without stepping on someone else's rights. Why is person A more important than person B? Doesn't make sense. No one's entitled to someone else's free labor.

People in power always want to stay in power. The people on power will always live better than the people not in power because that's human nature. You can see that is true all over the world. The rules they create never seem to apply to them. Limiting government keeps this in check.

That's a short synopsis.

I'm not a Tea Party member, but I agree with everything you posted. I'm tired of the handouts. I'm tired of entitlement. I'm tired of paying for other peoples' mistakes. I do think we have an obligation to help those less fortunate, but I don't think we are really "helping" by giving perpetual handouts. If anything, we are giving people just enough to survive and that's not really helping.

I think many (not all) Democrats love keeping poor people poor. After all, as long as they are poor, they will need welfare, food stamps, etc... And as long as they need those things, they will continue to vote for those who want to keep providing it. Keeping poor people poor is the best way to ensure poor people keep voting democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

Honest but nonsensical. Like many Tea Partiers, it's clear you don't understand how money works. Of course the money we're spending is money we have. The level of debt is not even particularly high compared w/ the post-WWII debt which coincided with the greatest economic expansion in our history.

There are two types of reactionary: a) those who use the specter of "debt" as a club to beat down progressive (and only) progressive spending initiatives; and b) those who actually believe there's a debt crisis at hand, and who fervently believe it's the single most critical national security issue there is, and which must be addressed immediately--but only when there's a Democrat in the white house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

Name one administration that didn't spend money we didn't have preferably in the 20th or 21st century.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am. It makes sense to me that handouts should not be permanent because they become a way of life - too easy, people feel entitled and forget how to work. They are too divorced from the struggle. It also reflects badly on government, because it shows a lack of trust in people to help shape their own lives. Hand ups, not hand outs, are best.

I see that the larger government becomes, the less efficient it is. Also, running a country as large as the USA, there needs to proper delegation, which is what the Constitution iis designed to do. Anything not in there falls to the state and local governments. This is by design. Look at any well-run company and you will see this type of delegation in action.

Spread the wealth sounds good, but you can't do that through legislation without stepping on someone else's rights. Why is person A more important than person B? Doesn't make sense. No one's entitled to someone else's free labor.

People in power always want to stay in power. The people on power will always live better than the people not in power because that's human nature. You can see that is true all over the world. The rules they create never seem to apply to them. Limiting government keeps this in check.

That's a short synopsis.

I'm not a Tea Party member, but I agree with everything you posted. I'm tired of the handouts. I'm tired of entitlement. I'm tired of paying for other peoples' mistakes. I do think we have an obligation to help those less fortunate, but I don't think we are really "helping" by giving perpetual handouts. If anything, we are giving people just enough to survive and that's not really helping.

I think many (not all) Democrats love keeping poor people poor. After all, as long as they are poor, they will need welfare, food stamps, etc... And as long as they need those things, they will continue to vote for those who want to keep providing it. Keeping poor people poor is the best way to ensure poor people keep voting democrat.

I'm PP. Bingo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

Name one administration that didn't spend money we didn't have preferably in the 20th or 21st century.

Exactly.

In the past, we have simply grown our economy faster than the debt has piled up. TP & GOP folks would prefer our economy remain stagnant, and we pay down the debt. Economically, it's a fantastically bad idea. Politically, it seems to appeal to folks with just enough economics knowledge to be dangerous. Let's call them the "Economics 101" voter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am. It makes sense to me that handouts should not be permanent because they become a way of life - too easy, people feel entitled and forget how to work. They are too divorced from the struggle. It also reflects badly on government, because it shows a lack of trust in people to help shape their own lives. Hand ups, not hand outs, are best.

I see that the larger government becomes, the less efficient it is. Also, running a country as large as the USA, there needs to proper delegation, which is what the Constitution iis designed to do. Anything not in there falls to the state and local governments. This is by design. Look at any well-run company and you will see this type of delegation in action.

Spread the wealth sounds good, but you can't do that through legislation without stepping on someone else's rights. Why is person A more important than person B? Doesn't make sense. No one's entitled to someone else's free labor.

People in power always want to stay in power. The people on power will always live better than the people not in power because that's human nature. You can see that is true all over the world. The rules they create never seem to apply to them. Limiting government keeps this in check.

That's a short synopsis.

I'm not a Tea Party member, but I agree with everything you posted. I'm tired of the handouts. I'm tired of entitlement. I'm tired of paying for other peoples' mistakes. I do think we have an obligation to help those less fortunate, but I don't think we are really "helping" by giving perpetual handouts. If anything, we are giving people just enough to survive and that's not really helping.

I think many (not all) Democrats love keeping poor people poor. After all, as long as they are poor, they will need welfare, food stamps, etc... And as long as they need those things, they will continue to vote for those who want to keep providing it. Keeping poor people poor is the best way to ensure poor people keep voting democrat.

I'm PP. Bingo.

Exactly. The teabaggers and the GOP in general doesn't care a fig for "the debt". What they care about is dismantling the social safety net. If they can collapse government spending--even if it means ensuring the economy contracts--in order to make sure young bucks don't get Obamaphones and food stamp steaks, they'll do so on principal.

Meanwhile, growth in military spending is sacrosanct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

I'm sorry, I must have missed the rise of the Tea Party and its hysteria during GWB's term in office when he doubled the national debt, turned our budget surplus into deficits, broke the balanced budget agreement that had been in place since Clinton was in office, launched two wars that were not legitimate (i..e, UNCONSTITUTIONAL) and resulted in many thousands of lives of patriotic americans lost or severely impacted, failed to provide benefits for the military and finally, asleep at the wheel while the country was in the midst of the most severe economic and financial meltdown since the 1930's.

lets also not forget that the greatest period of economic expansion, what led to the great society, the strong middle class, a strong American ethos, a well educated society - were progressive programs put in place under FDR, followed through by level-headed Republicans (Eisenhower's building of the interstate system was a a great overreach of the federal government - you hating him too?).

the decline of the American society started with the "me first" attitude of the Reagan white house - sorry to trample on his grave, but let's be intellectually honest about how we got to where we are today. Clinton, despite his personal pecadillos put us back on the right track. GWB - tell me what has he actually has earned and done - at least this President can spell Constitution.

So spare us please the nonsense from Fox News - I'm all for reasoned ideas from the libertarian party (I'm one actually), but the Tea Party while it started in theory on good ground, within a minute or two quickly morphed into the pet project of some of the stupidest politicians ever elected (Bachman, Palin and many others) all to simply attack a black President.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:just curious of the reasoning behind wanting to be a part of this mixed bag of nuts

I'm a Tea Party patriot. If I had to put it succinctly, I'd say it's a combination of things:

- I'm pretty angry, because let's face it, I thought I was going to be rich, or that my superior intellect would in some way be recognized by the universe, but that hasn't happened.

- Meanwhile, there's some guy running the country who's probably not even American, has done nothing in his life other than run the Harvard Law Review and organize poor people, and has never had to make payroll. Since our whole society is one big giveaway to racial "interest groups" the only explanation for this is affirmative action.

- I am definitely not a racist. I actually know black people and like some of them. Others I don't like. I just wish the good ones would talk to the bad ones and get them to stop acting in self-destructive ways (i.e. "pull your pants up" says Bill Cosby [who I *love*, btw])

- Politics is confusing, and it's really hard to follow a lot of what's going on. At the same time, I'm the kind of person who really likes to feel like I have expertise in all things. But since I spend all my time reading websites that are light on news, and heavy on fodder for resentment, I don't really have the facts necessary to understand what's going on. But ironically enough, the less expertise one has, the less ability one has to evaluate one's level of expertise.

- I see the country is going in the wrong direction (gay people getting married, VD vaccines for 12 year olds, swearing on TV). You can tell the country's going to Hell in a handbasket, and something has to be done to bring it back in line with values of Real Americans--which means me and my neighbors.

- If we have to make the economy crater to get things back on track, I'm fine with that, because America's already sinking into the muck. And besides, if we have another recession, it's the moochers and takers who are going to suffer. Not hard-working Real Americans like myself.

And I am sure you are a Female catholic too!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

I'm sorry, I must have missed the rise of the Tea Party and its hysteria during GWB's term in office when he doubled the national debt, turned our budget surplus into deficits, broke the balanced budget agreement that had been in place since Clinton was in office, launched two wars that were not legitimate (i..e, UNCONSTITUTIONAL) and resulted in many thousands of lives of patriotic americans lost or severely impacted, failed to provide benefits for the military and finally, asleep at the wheel while the country was in the midst of the most severe economic and financial meltdown since the 1930's.

lets also not forget that the greatest period of economic expansion, what led to the great society, the strong middle class, a strong American ethos, a well educated society - were progressive programs put in place under FDR, followed through by level-headed Republicans (Eisenhower's building of the interstate system was a a great overreach of the federal government - you hating him too?).

the decline of the American society started with the "me first" attitude of the Reagan white house - sorry to trample on his grave, but let's be intellectually honest about how we got to where we are today. Clinton, despite his personal pecadillos put us back on the right track. GWB - tell me what has he actually has earned and done - at least this President can spell Constitution.

So spare us please the nonsense from Fox News - I'm all for reasoned ideas from the libertarian party (I'm one actually), but the Tea Party while it started in theory on good ground, within a minute or two quickly morphed into the pet project of some of the stupidest politicians ever elected (Bachman, Palin and many others) all to simply attack a black President.

Exactly. And any tea bagger that wants to deny it, is just flat out lying.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/10/15/confederate-flag-in-front-of-white-house-our-politics-as-war-by-other-means/

[Anonymous]

even the Libertarian party was silent when GWB pushed the No Child Left Behind Act - you talk about the federal government interfering in people's life, Bush, a Republican, petitioned and signed his signature piece of domestic legislation that allows the federal government to dictat what your children will learn.

Where was the outrage - oh yes, the Tea Party did not exist, Bachman, Palin, et. al were completely silent and conveniently forget this actually happened.

and while we're on it, did the Tea Party scream when the medicate prescription drug plan went through? again, under GWB.

oh, and the trampling of civil liberties - through wire tapping, the Patriot Act, the CREATION (i.e. expansion of the government) of Homeland security - all endorsed and happily accepted by the Tea Party b/c it was Republican and he was a white President.

if this had been a Dem, outrage. A Black Dem - what we have now.

discuss

[Anonymous]

If you want to grasp what the "Tea Party" phenomenon is, it's important to understand that there's always been a right-wing fringe element in US politics. And it erupts periodically when they start losing:

As it happens, I’ve been doing some reading about John Kennedy, and what I find startling, and even surprising, is how absolutely consistent and unchanged the ideology of the extreme American right has been over the past fifty years, from father to son and now, presumably, on to son from father again. The real analogue to today’s unhinged right wing in America is yesterday’s unhinged right wing in America. This really is your grandfather’s right, if not, to be sure, your grandfather’s Republican Party. Half a century ago, the type was much more evenly distributed between the die-hard, neo-Confederate wing of the Democratic Party and the Goldwater wing of the Republicans, an equitable division of loonies that would begin to end after J.F.K.’s death. (A year later, the Civil Rights Act passed, Goldwater ran, Reagan emerged, and we began the permanent sorting out of our factions into what would be called, anywhere but here, a party of the center right and a party of the extreme right.)

Reading through the literature on the hysterias of 1963, the continuity of beliefs is plain: Now, as then, there is said to be a conspiracy in the highest places to end American Constitutional rule and replace it with a Marxist dictatorship, evidenced by a plan in which your family doctor will be replaced by a federal bureaucrat—mostly for unnamable purposes, but somehow involving the gleeful killing off of the aged. There is also the conviction, in both eras, that only a handful of Congressmen and polemicists (then mostly in newspapers; now on TV) stand between honest Americans and the apocalypse, and that the man presiding over that plan is not just a dupe but personally depraved, an active collaborator with our enemies, a secret something or other, and any necessary means to bring about the end of his reign are justified and appropriate. And fifty years ago, as today, groups with these beliefs, far from being banished to the fringe of political life, were closely entangled and intertwined with Senators and Congressmen and right-wing multi-millionaires.

http://nyr.kr/19UkcKS

[Anonymous]

Also:

The really weird thing—the American exception in it all—then as much as now, is how tiny all the offenses are. French right-wingers really did have a powerful, Soviet-affiliated Communist Party to deal with, as their British counterparts really had honest-to-god Socialists around, socializing stuff. But the Bircher-centered loonies and the Tea Partiers created a world of fantasy, willing mild-mannered, conflict-adverse centrists like J.F.K. and Obama into socialist Supermen.

Perhaps this is in large part because the real grievance can’t quite be articulated. The common core belief, then and now, is actually descended from “Huck Finn” ’s unforgettable Pappy and his views on the “guv’mint”: the federal government exists to take money from hard-working white people and give it to lazy black people, and the President is helping to make this happen. This conviction, then and now, may not fairly be called racist in the sense that it isn’t just (or always) an expression of personal bigotry; rather, it is more like a resentment at an imagined ethnic spoils system gone wrong. (Hatred is less the key than a throbbing sense of unfairness.) Presumably, it makes space for a handful of hard-working black and brown people who are being victimized, too. (If there is much doubt that there is a racial component, the disparate reactions to Obama’s mythical foreign birth in Kenya and Ted Cruz’s actual one in Canada should put it to rest.) A focus group on the current state of the G.O.P., conducted by Democracy Corps, an organization put together by James Carville and Stanley Greenberg, was on the whole quite sympathetic to Tea Party and to evangelical feelings of alienation from incomprehensible social change, making it plain that the core grievance is still the over-riding feeling that “their party is losing to a Democratic Party of big government whose goal is to expand programs that mainly benefit minorities.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

You should take a basic Econ class and you might understand a little bit about why gov't spending during a recession isn't a bad thing. Thanks to our previous right-wing president for that recession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Tea Party Patriot for one simple reason - Our current administration is spending money we don't have. They are spending other people's money at "historic" rates. Our country is truly a great country - not many countries would allow others to post their views (regardless of how negative their words may be) without threat of arrest. However, at the rate we are going, our country will cease to exist as a republic in the not too distant future.

I'm sorry, I must have missed the rise of the Tea Party and its hysteria during GWB's term in office when he doubled the national debt, turned our budget surplus into deficits, broke the balanced budget agreement that had been in place since Clinton was in office, launched two wars that were not legitimate (i..e, UNCONSTITUTIONAL) and resulted in many thousands of lives of patriotic americans lost or severely impacted, failed to provide benefits for the military and finally, asleep at the wheel while the country was in the midst of the most severe economic and financial meltdown since the 1930's.

lets also not forget that the greatest period of economic expansion, what led to the great society, the strong middle class, a strong American ethos, a well educated society - were progressive programs put in place under FDR, followed through by level-headed Republicans (Eisenhower's building of the interstate system was a a great overreach of the federal government - you hating him too?).

the decline of the American society started with the "me first" attitude of the Reagan white house - sorry to trample on his grave, but let's be intellectually honest about how we got to where we are today. Clinton, despite his personal pecadillos put us back on the right track. GWB - tell me what has he actually has earned and done - at least this President can spell Constitution.

So spare us please the nonsense from Fox News - I'm all for reasoned ideas from the libertarian party (I'm one actually), but the Tea Party while it started in theory on good ground, within a minute or two quickly morphed into the pet project of some of the stupidest politicians ever elected (Bachman, Palin and many others) all to simply attack a black President.

BOOM!

[Anonymous]

Let me get this straight, tea partiers hate handouts to pathetic poor people who just love living on welfare but handouts/bailouts to huge corrupt selfish corporations are awesome? Do you also have a 22 million dollar mansion in the Hamptons that you bought from profits while laying off employees and taking tax payer money?