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

[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.

OOOOOOO...MMMMMMM....GGGGGG!
ROFLMAO!!!!!

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry folks are piling on and using unkind language in response to your post. I will be polite, but I must take issue with this:

Anonymous wrote:
I see that the larger government becomes, the less efficient it is.

It's factually, objectively untrue. "The Government", by every measure, provides more services to more people and institutions at a lower cost than at any time in its history. I won't even get in to subjective judgments like "better" or "safer". I'm talking strictly about the quantifiable elements.

My concern is, when you write something like that, which is so clearly an unsupported soundbite, that the rest of your argument is probably influenced by politicians and pundits who have the stated goal of stalling the work of the nation, of increasing the burdens the poor carry, and of increasing animosity among an already fractious crowd (by which I mean Congress).

You can state that your belief system rejects the provision of services to people by government, but you can't say what you said and not set off some alarm bells.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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?

Lets not forget their stolen pensions!

And now they want to spend OUR social security money. Actually they have wanted to spend our SS for a very long time. If the right wingers get in control all of the working folk are SHIT out of LUCK. You can kiss SS goodbye!

Get out and VOTE every time not just the presidential elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I see that the larger government becomes, the less efficient it is.

So how do you want them to spend our tax dollars??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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?

Don't forget: It's the republicans who mostly oppose any increase in minimum wage. Not only do they want the unemployed to starve, they want the least-skilled-but-still-working to get very, very thin.

You want to talk about work ethic?? Try getting up and going to McDonalds six days a week for $8.25 an hour, for years, with no paid vacation, no hope of promotion. THAT'S some hard work, right there.

[Anonymous]

Those jobs were not intended to support people. They should be starter jobs or supplemental income for working moms/dads. Going to work is a skill in itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those jobs were not intended to support people. They should be starter jobs or supplemental income for working moms/dads. Going to work is a skill in itself.

What freakin planet are you living on honey?? Stop driving your husband Mercedes and get a job!!

[Anonymous]

I'm tired of paying for other peoples' mistakes.

Me too, that's why I am angry about all the money that was dumped into the Iraq war.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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

Common Core? Conservatives were indeed complaining about Bush. I was one of them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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?

Ha! +1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm tired of paying for other peoples' mistakes.

Me too, that's why I am angry about all the money that was dumped into the Iraq war.

+1000

And all of the dead and disabled soldiers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry folks are piling on and using unkind language in response to your post. I will be polite, but I must take issue with this:

Anonymous wrote:
I see that the larger government becomes, the less efficient it is.

It's factually, objectively untrue. "The Government", by every measure, provides more services to more people and institutions at a lower cost than at any time in its history. I won't even get in to subjective judgments like "better" or "safer". I'm talking strictly about the quantifiable elements.

My concern is, when you write something like that, which is so clearly an unsupported soundbite, that the rest of your argument is probably influenced by politicians and pundits who have the stated goal of stalling the work of the nation, of increasing the burdens the poor carry, and of increasing animosity among an already fractious crowd (by which I mean Congress).

You can state that your belief system rejects the provision of services to people by government, but you can't say what you said and not set off some alarm bells.

Can you explain children who die due to social services inefficiencies ? Why veteran care is so poor? Why doctors can't pay their overhead if they took only Medicare patients? How the IRS makes errors and destroys people's lives through Leon's, garnishings, etc? If private corporations made these mistakes, heads would roll. And do. Government? Not so much.

[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.

Are either of you aware of the lifetime limits on these handouts?

[Anonymous]

That is liens, not Leon's. Sheesh!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Can you explain children who die due to social services inefficiencies ? Why veteran care is so poor? Why doctors can't pay their overhead if they took only Medicare patients? How the IRS makes errors and destroys people's lives through Leon's, garnishings, etc? If private corporations made these mistakes, heads would roll. And do. Government? Not so much.

I can say that FEWER children die, for any reason, now than at any other time in history. A lot of it is improved nutrition (WIC, food stamps), a lot of it is improved medical care (medicaid). Tax collection has ALWAYS been a source of potential corruption, and a source of great loss when abused. It is better regulated now than it ever has been.

Am I saying that everything is great and we should just leave it all alone and our work here is done? Hell no.

Are you saying that an institution that doesn't function at 100% effectiveness and perfection should be abolished, whether or not there is something better to replace it? Yeah, it kinda sounds like you are.