Tea Party Movement

[ironeagle2006]

bionicarm. Lets look at what the Tea Party wants compared to Obama shall we. Obama wants to Force us to BUY Health Insurance then Tax us all on whazt we spend to buy Health Insurance as INCOME. No where in the US Constitituion does it appear that the US Goverment can force you to buy anything. Even the Commerce clause they are trying to base this on does not allow for this in anyway shape or form. Also it is kind of Funny that Obama SS# listed is for a Woman that was born in 1897 In CT when he was born in 1961 so they say in Hawaii. A 042 prefix is not the Hawaii one. Most of the people that are running and Winning in the Primaries are Small Business men or have run a Sucessful Business in the past. Name one Business Obama has EVER RUN. His entire life has been on the Goverment Payroll.

 

[bionicarm]

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement#post_3309762
Democrats keep saying they don't fear the Tea Party. If that's the case why do they keep demonizing them? They call Reid's opponent Angle a radical yet it is Reid who just attached a amnesty provision on a defense spending bill that gives ILLEGAL aliens taxpayer subsidized college tuition while LEGAL immigrants and US citizens would have to pay full tuition. Who exactly are the extremists?
I don't 'fear' the Tea Party. I think that many of them expouse these off-the-wall radical ideas that makes me VERY afraid of what type of laws they would create that would deny MY rights as an American citizen. This Sharon Angle character at one time stated she'd have no problem repealing the 21st Amendement (she's apparently a teetotaler). She tried to integrate Scientology into some prison in Nevada, and this one statement regarding 2nd Amendment rights makes me REALLY afraid:
 

"You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. And in fact Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years.
I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out."

 

 

[spanko]

Why does that statement make you afraid sir.

 

[mrdc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309771
Why does that statement make you afraid sir.
I'm guessing the revolution part ...

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ironeagle2006 http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309769
bionicarm. Lets look at what the Tea Party wants compared to Obama shall we. Obama wants to Force us to BUY Health Insurance then Tax us all on whazt we spend to buy Health Insurance as INCOME. No where in the US Constitituion does it appear that the US Goverment can force you to buy anything. Even the Commerce clause they are trying to base this on does not allow for this in anyway shape or form. Also it is kind of Funny that Obama SS# listed is for a Woman that was born in 1897 In CT when he was born in 1961 so they say in Hawaii. A 042 prefix is not the Hawaii one. Most of the people that are running and Winning in the Primaries are Small Business men or have run a Sucessful Business in the past. Name one Business Obama has EVER RUN. His entire life has been on the Goverment Payroll.
 
Your little SS conspiracy is one reason I think the Tea Party members are a bunch of loons. I can't beleive the time and effort spent by some of these people to find legal flaws in Obama's character, with I guess the motive to have him impeached. GET OVER IT!
 
The government doesn't force you to buy medical insurance? What do you call MEDICARE/MEDICAID? They take, what, 4% of my personal income and FORCE me to buy into that Government-mandated program? I have perfectly good health insurance today that I pay for. I have NEVER touched any Medicare benefits. If we don't come up with some type of alternative to cover retirees health problems (i.e Obama's helath care plan), I won't have the opportunity to use those benefits because that program will be BROKE in another 5 - 10 years. So all my hard-earned money that I've thrown into that kitty for over 40 years is flushed down the drain, and I get NOTHING.
 
Well if you look at his bio, it says he worked as a civil rights attorney in Chicago and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004. Not really a business, but it is a non-government job. So you're saying that no American is qualified to run for a Congressional office unless they've been a lawyer or owned a business?
 

 

[bionicarm]

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309771
Why does that statement make you afraid sir.
Why? Do you honestly want to see another Civil War in this country? Would you actually resort to physical violence and "storm the White House" with guns blazing to prove your point? Do you watch the news and see this type of stuff going on in the Middle East, and even in Europe? If you like that sort of thing, go spend a few days down in Mexico. Better take a flack jacket with you.

 

[spanko]

I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out."
 
 
First off I believe there are many who have stood for, fought for and will continue to stand for the liberties set up by the founding fathers. Remember they we running for tyranny and took up arms to fight for what is These United States.
 
Also that 4% of your personal income taken by the force of a gun, because believe me if you did not want to pay it think about what would happen to you, is what Americans have to begin to stand up against. There are ways to stop this without jeopardizing your already large input into the system.
 
On the second amendment rights the framers did not call for a well regulated militia run by the congress, Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist #29 stated........
 
" . . . but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights . . . ."
 
Am I calling for armed revolution, no, but I am one who believes there needs to be a revolution against the government that has been growing in scope and power since the The New Deal.
 
Stop the wars, close down the bases we have all over the world, use the monies saved to protect our own borders and pay of the stupid debt the government keeps building upon, stop aid to other countries and get our own house in order. Limit the Federal government to the enumerated powers in the constitution, lower the tax burden on the people and let the market work. Stop bailing out companies that make bad decisions, let them fail. etc. etc. etc.
 
 
"Posterity, you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it." John Adams

 

[bionicarm]

 
 
Stop the wars, close down the bases we have all over the world, use the monies saved to protect our own borders and pay of the stupid debt the government keeps building upon, stop aid to other countries and get our own house in order. Limit the Federal government to the enumerated powers in the constitution, lower the tax burden on the people and let the market work. Stop bailing out companies that make bad decisions, let them fail. etc. etc. etc.
I actually agree with a lot of the things you stated. Realistically, you'd NEVER get anyone to agree to limiting our military power. I'm all for just protecting our borders. But if you don't have eyes and ears sitting around the radical 'hot beds' of the world, you'd end up with another attack like the Japanese did on Pearl Harbor.
 
I'm all for lowering taxes, but if you do that, where do you get the money to pay for the fundamental government programs you rely on a daily basis (DOT - Interstate highways, Military, FEMA, CDC, Food and Drug Admin, etc.)?
 
Bailing out major corporations is a toss-up. Depends on the industry you're bailing out. If we hadn't bailed out GM and Chrysler, you would've had a major adverse affect on the economy of several Northeastern states - Illinois, Michigan, Ohio. Those states are already running at Depression-era levels, with some of the highest unemployment rates and house foreclosures in the country. Letting GM 'fail' would've pretty much put the last nail in the coffin for the rest of the people who not only work in GM factories, but the hundreds of companies that supply product and parts to GM. Not to mention the myriad of small businesses like restaurants, clothing stores, hardware stores, etc. That's what you don't realize when you let major corporations fail. It doesn't just affect that company.

 

[stdreb27]

imo this is the cookie cutter example of the success the democrats have had. In bionics mind, the Tea Party are a bunch of nut case loonies. Then he goes and spouts off all these unfounded proofs to support his views.
The reality is, these guys aren't extremists. Wanting a government to follow their initial charter is not extremist at all. Now the party in power and their chief in the white house. That is a real extremist.

 

[spanko]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309779
 
I actually agree with a lot of the things you stated. Realistically, you'd NEVER get anyone to agree to limiting our military power. I'm all for just protecting our borders. But if you don't have eyes and ears sitting around the radical 'hot beds' of the world, you'd end up with another attack like the Japanese did on Pearl Harbor.
 
Not saying limit our military power. We need to be strong, but we need to pay for things with real money, not borrowed money. You can have ears, and I would argue we do have them and they are not the military bases, around the world at a much less monetary cost than what we have.
 
I'm all for lowering taxes, but if you do that, where do you get the money to pay for the fundamental government programs you rely on a daily basis (DOT - Interstate highways, Military, FEMA, CDC, Food and Drug Admin, etc.)?
 
IMO most of what you listed there is better left to private industry and the market to take care of.
I won't bore you with quoting article 1 section 8 and the enumerated powers but just let me say it is limiting in what the congress should be appropriating money for. If it should be, needs to be, or people want it to be changed the vehicle for doing so is the amendment process, not congress just willy nilly spending on what they want to.
 
Bailing out major corporations is a toss-up. Depends on the industry you're bailing out. If we hadn't bailed out GM and Chrysler, you would've had a major adverse affect on the economy of several Northeastern states - Illinois, Michigan, Ohio. Those states are already running at Depression-era levels, with some of the highest unemployment rates and house foreclosures in the country. Letting GM 'fail' would've pretty much put the last nail in the coffin for the rest of the people who not only work in GM factories, but the hundreds of companies that supply product and parts to GM. Not to mention the myriad of small businesses like restaurants, clothing stores, hardware stores, etc. That's what you don't realize when you let major corporations fail. It doesn't just affect that company.
 
I live in Michigan, I would be hard pressed to believe that;
1. it is better off because the feds bailed out GM and Chrysler.
2. GM and Chrysler would not have been able to declare bankruptcy and came out of it.
3. There would not be some other company that would pick up the slack left by GM and Chrysler, read here opportunities for other car companies whether in existence now or not to gain some of the vacated market share.
 
It is how the market works, there are winners and losers.
 
Those states you have listed are not the top ones in foreclosures by the way. Also those states have high tax rates to try to fund their social programs and are failing at it. They are also big union states that have driven industry out with high wages and benefits.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309791
 
You'd actually trust individual states to manage their respective interstate highways? Cali can't even support their local infrastructures because they're about to go bankrupt. You think your potholes in Michigan are bad now, wait until you'd have to rely on the state to repair them. You gas would go up to $5.00/gal so they could generate the revenue to maintain them.
 
You also want each state to mandate their own Food and Drug Administration? Sure, Idaho can start using DDT on their potatoe crops. That stuff doesn't hurt you.
 
Natural disasters? We saw how well Lousiana handled Katrina. Where you going to get the money in your state when a Billion dollar natural disaster occurs? Only place I know is to raise your state taxes, soi what's the difference?
 
 
Again, it's not just GM. It's the hundreds of suppliers and feeder buisinesses that would suffer. What other automobile company would "pick up the slack". GM, Ford, and Chrysler shuttered perfectly good automotive manufacturing facilities all through your state years ago. Seen any orther auto builder coming there to revamp them and start building their cars? You won't because it's cheaper for Toyota, Kia, Hyundai, and Honda to build the cars overseas and import them into the US.
 
Michigan doesn't have one of the highest foreclosure rates? Been to Flint lately?

 

[spanko]

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309822
You'd actually trust individual states to manage their respective interstate highways? Cali can't even support their local infrastructures because they're about to go bankrupt. You think your potholes in Michigan are bad now, wait until you'd have to rely on the state to repair them. You gas would go up to $5.00/gal so they could generate the revenue to maintain them.
I said private industry, no I don't want the states taxing me for this either.
 
You also want each state to mandate their own Food and Drug Administration? Sure, Idaho can start using DDT on their potatoe crops. That stuff doesn't hurt you.
I want the market to take care of this.
 
Natural disasters? We saw how well Lousiana handled Katrina. Where you going to get the money in your state when a Billion dollar natural disaster occurs? Only place I know is to raise your state taxes, soi what's the difference?
Problem here is Louisiana did not handle it. The people of Louisiana did not heed the warnings and get out of New Orleans. Stupid is as stupid does, why should the rest of us have to pay for it. Notice I said have to, there are plenty of relief organizations that exist to help with this kind of thing, and when people have the money to do so they fund them pretty well.
 
 
Again, it's not just GM. It's the hundreds of suppliers and feeder buisinesses that would suffer. What other automobile company would "pick up the slack". GM, Ford, and Chrysler shuttered perfectly good automotive manufacturing facilities all through your state years ago. Seen any orther auto builder coming there to revamp them and start building their cars? You won't because it's cheaper for Toyota, Kia, Hyundai, and Honda to build the cars overseas and import them into the US.
You miss the point, or maybe you said it, they priced themselves out of the market by bending to the insane demands of the unions. You won't see any other companies coming to Michigan to build cars because of the enormous tax burden they would have here. Until we elect people that have an understanding of how the economy works no company is going to come to Michigan. They are better off in the southern states where people have a right to work and unions cannot shut them out. I'm sorry but have you seen how many transplant car companies have built, are building factories in the US? Look at where they are building them. Non union, right to work states.
 
Michigan doesn't have one of the highest foreclosure rates? Been to Flint lately?
Sorry but California, Florida, Arizona all have higher rates of foreclosure.

 

[bang guy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309822
Sure, Idaho can start using DDT on their potatoe crops. That stuff doesn't hurt you.
What's wrong with DDT?
 

 

[spanko]

You know another thing about bailouts, think about what that is. The government giving money to the concern so it doesn't fail when if the wouldn't have taken the money in the form of taxes in the first place, they wouldn't have to give it back!

 

[stdreb27]

"No one is safe: Several environmental organisations want to abolish DDT entirely, claiming it is a threat to human health. For example, Clifton Curtis of the World-Wide Fund for Nature/World Wildlife Fund asserts, "As long as DDT exists anywhere on the globe, none of us is safe."
But DDT's record speaks for itself. For years most Americans and Europeans ingested substantial amounts of DDT in food every day; the United States alone sprayed 70000 tons on crops every year for 20 years. Kids on bikes weaved in and out of the DDT clouds blown over the streets in countless American towns to control mosquitoes. Many millions of homes in Asia, Southern Africa and Latin America have been sprayed once or twice a year with DDT. Yet no adverse health effects have been reported. "Scientists have searched exhaustively , but found nothing substantial," says Mary Galinski, a molecular biologist at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and president of Malaria Foundation International.
Says Chris Curtis of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine: "There is no convincing evidence that DDT, as used indoors against malaria mosquitoes, has caused any harm to humans."
While DDT opponents point to scientific studies indicating a danger to human health, the evidence, says Amir Attaran, of Harvard University, is vague and contradictory. For example, one US study found that women with higher incidences of DDT in their bodies were more likely to have breast cancer. But numerous other studies failed to come up with the same result.
Nevertheless, DDT has been lumped with 11 other, persistent organic pollutants - `the dirty dozen' - now set. for reduction or elimination by international treaty at a meeting being held in Johannesburg from December 4 to 9, under the auspices of the UN Environmental Program. More than 110 countries and at least 50 Non-Governmental Organisations, will be taking part. Once agreed; the treaty will be legally binding worldwide. "
http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidinthenews/articles/SA_Readers_Digest_1200.html
 

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309770
 
I don't 'fear' the Tea Party. I think that many of them expouse these off-the-wall radical ideas that makes me VERY afraid of what type of laws they would create that would deny MY rights as an American citizen. This Sharon Angle character at one time stated she'd have no problem repealing the 21st Amendement (she's apparently a teetotaler). She tried to integrate Scientology into some prison in Nevada, and this one statement regarding 2nd Amendment rights makes me REALLY afraid:
 

"You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. And in fact Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years.
I hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out."

 
 
If you care to read the federalist papers and other writings by those who wrote the second amendment you will find she is correct about the rational behind the second amendment and the Jefferson quote is accurate, so what?
 
 
I don't like Al Frankin or Bernie Sanders just to name a couple but I don't fear them because they are each 1 vote of 100. Having a sprinkling of "extremists" from both sides is a good thing unless they are in a position of power like Reid.
 

 

[reefraff]

The Democrats are the most bigoted group of people I've seen. Anyone who doesn't agree with them is Racist, crazy, stupid. drunk. misinformed etc. They make far more hateful statements about their opposition than the Republicans ever have. I am talking about mainstream well known political figures.
 
Nancy Pelosi said unemployment checks are the best stimulus. She said we had to pass the healthcare bill so we could see what was really in it. She's two heartbeats from the presidency. Now that's scary.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309857
The Democrats are the most bigoted group of people I've seen. Anyone who doesn't agree with them is Racist, crazy, stupid. drunk. misinformed etc. They make far more hateful statements about their opposition than the Republicans ever have. I am talking about mainstream well known political figures.
 
Nancy Pelosi said unemployment checks are the best stimulus. She said we had to pass the healthcare bill so we could see what was really in it. She's two heartbeats from the presidency. Now that's scary.
I take it you hate Democrats.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309832
 
 
Private industry = Toll Roads. I'd rather pay higher gas taxes than have to deal with tolls roads around every corner.
 
Actually, Toyota built their new Tundra plant right here in San Antonio. And yes, they don't allow unions in their plants. However, for San Antonio/Texas to get that plant, we had to give them a multi-million dollar/multi year tax abatement. They essentially get to run their factory tax free on us local taxpayers. The ideology behind that is it brings jobs and other businesses to the area, and it supposedly supposed to be a direct wash. Unfortunately, I don't think its worked out that way.
 

 

[spanko]

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309879
Private industry = Toll Roads. I'd rather pay higher gas taxes than have to deal with tolls roads around every corner.
 
Your tax dollars that are supposed to go to roads don't all go there. Those earmarks take care of that.I'd rather have someone that is going to actually make a profit, supply real jobs and pay the money to them that watch it get squandered by a bunch of holes that take the money from Texas and then spread it out to other states. At least with the toll roads you have a better chance of it staying in your state and getting used for your roads. Besides with things like EZ-Pass and such, you don't even have to stop, or very rarely.
 
Actually, Toyota built their new Tundra plant right here in San Antonio. And yes, they don't allow unions in their plants. However, for San Antonio/Texas to get that plant, we had to give them a multi-million dollar/multi year tax abatement. They essentially get to run their factory tax free on us local taxpayers. The ideology behind that is it brings jobs and other businesses to the area, and it supposedly supposed to be a direct wash. Unfortunately, I don't think its worked out that way.
 
 
I don't think you can have the argument both ways to suit what you are discussing at the moment. Lose the GM and Chrysler plants and OMG the world will end for the associated support business. Bring in a new Toyota plant and it mean nothing for the associated businesses. WHAT?