Tea Party Movement

stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
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.
 
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.
 
 
The funny thing is, dems have for the past 9 years arguing that the Bush tax cuts caused the "recession." But stuff like attracting big business with tax breaks specific to them kinda slaps that in the face doesn't it.
But on the that topic.
There is a very good area for debate right there. And it should be debated. I don't think it is nessessarily right for a government to give favorable treatment to company X for building Y in their area. But on the flip side of that, corporations aren't really anything, but a legal fiction. So one way or the other the citizen will end up paying that tax...
 
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3309897
 
The funny thing is, dems have for the past 9 years arguing that the Bush tax cuts caused the "recession." But stuff like attracting big business with tax breaks specific to them kinda slaps that in the face doesn't it.
But on the that topic.
There is a very good area for debate right there. And it should be debated. I don't think it is nessessarily right for a government to give favorable treatment to company X for building Y in their area. But on the flip side of that, corporations aren't really anything, but a legal fiction. So one way or the other the citizen will end up paying that tax...
 
I have no idea if this is a widespread practice but I have to say it in defense of Bionic no matter how painful it is to give him ammunition. The place I work at used the tax breaks to build an entire wholey owned offshore subsidiary for IT. As a result about 2000 high paid IT jobs belong to India nationals instead of US citizens. That's a LOT of money removed permanently from the economy. If a lot of businesses did that, well, it could contribute to a recession that might never end.
 
Granted, it was Clinton that allowed that to happen but Bush didn't lift a finger to prevent it.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/20#post_3309891
 
There's a long stretch of US 281 that had Fed dollars earmarked 5 years ago to expand that section of highwy. The tree huggers came in and forced these environmental studies, and now the state said the money allocated for that project is gone. Now the city wants to toll that section of the road to get it built. The company that will be in charge of assessing the tolls, and managing the profits is a company based out of GERMANY. Please tell me how I will benefit from those revenues. The purpose of tolls is to pay to fund the expansion project. Once the project is paid for, the tolls are supposed to disappear. Unfortunately, they don't allow that cash cow to ever end, using the excuse they need to keeps the tolls to pay for ongoing repairs.
 
Where did I say it means nothing for the supplier companies who provide parts to Toyota? I'm saying our city gets absolutely no tax revenues from that massive Toyota manufacturing plant due to the city giving away the farm just to have them here. Toyota shut this new plant down for 6 months last year due to low sales volumes. Several of the supplier comapnies were forced to shut down and close because they couldn't keep their businesses afloat without the work from Toyota. So yeah, you shut down a plant, you affect more than just the employees working at that plant.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3309928
I have no idea if this is a widespread practice but I have to say it in defense of Bionic no matter how painful it is to give him ammunition. The place I work at used the tax breaks to build an entire wholey owned offshore subsidiary for IT. As a result about 2000 high paid IT jobs belong to India nationals instead of US citizens. That's a LOT of money removed permanently from the economy. If a lot of businesses did that, well, it could contribute to a recession that might never end.
 
Granted, it was Clinton that allowed that to happen but Bush didn't lift a finger to prevent it.
That isn't quite what he's talking about. He's refering to something that typically happens at the local level. Where the city or county will cut a deal with a major employeer. Say Toyota, Bass Pro usually does this too. At least in Texas they'll make a deal on property taxes, usually reducing them for X period of time. If they move a major point of operations into the tax area.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310076
There's a long stretch of US 281 that had Fed dollars earmarked 5 years ago to expand that section of highwy. The tree huggers came in and forced these environmental studies, and now the state said the money allocated for that project is gone. Now the city wants to toll that section of the road to get it built. The company that will be in charge of assessing the tolls, and managing the profits is a company based out of GERMANY. Please tell me how I will benefit from those revenues. The purpose of tolls is to pay to fund the expansion project. Once the project is paid for, the tolls are supposed to disappear. Unfortunately, they don't allow that cash cow to ever end, using the excuse they need to keeps the tolls to pay for ongoing repairs.
 
Where did I say it means nothing for the supplier companies who provide parts to Toyota? I'm saying our city gets absolutely no tax revenues from that massive Toyota manufacturing plant due to the city giving away the farm just to have them here. Toyota shut this new plant down for 6 months last year due to low sales volumes. Several of the supplier comapnies were forced to shut down and close because they couldn't keep their businesses afloat without the work from Toyota. So yeah, you shut down a plant, you affect more than just the employees working at that plant.
Well, they do argue, that all the support industry for say toyota. Would result in more revenue than if the it had never come to begin with...
 
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Well first off I did not continue the explanation here. The state would lease the land to the contractor. This would generate revenue for the state from said lease. It would be a bidding process with stipulations in the bid such as keeping the road conditions up. Imagine the savings to said state for the costs of now having a state road crew that works on the "federal" roads (we can discuss property rights here if you like) reduced to just enough to keep local roads up, plowed etc. Oh but then the same thing could apply to local roads. Another savings and actually revenue generator for the local economy? Hmmm, how about meter maids. Lease out the parking meters, have them actually generate revenue for the local economy, do away with the cost to the local government both in salaries and legacy costs.
The possibilities are endless, taking away control of the government(s) and putting it in the hands of private firms that would actually be able to "make a profit", create jobs, and get the work done without we the people being "taxed" for it.
This was the basis for the founders, local control, "limited" federal interference and a market that supplied real ongoing jobs to people.
 
jeff10

jeff10

Member
I am not a Republican or a Democrat like the other poster, and I like the Tea Party movement. Plus...Anytime I see the major media and people attacking something so "hardcore" I tend to think it is good against the establishment.
 
Less Taxes, less Government, I will take that.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310143
Well first off I did not continue the explanation here. The state would lease the land to the contractor. This would generate revenue for the state from said lease. It would be a bidding process with stipulations in the bid such as keeping the road conditions up. Imagine the savings to said state for the costs of now having a state road crew that works on the "federal" roads (we can discuss property rights here if you like) reduced to just enough to keep local roads up, plowed etc. Oh but then the same thing could apply to local roads. Another savings and actually revenue generator for the local economy? Hmmm, how about meter maids. Lease out the parking meters, have them actually generate revenue for the local economy, do away with the cost to the local government both in salaries and legacy costs.
The possibilities are endless, taking away control of the government(s) and putting it in the hands of private firms that would actually be able to "make a profit", create jobs, and get the work done without we the people being "taxed" for it.
This was the basis for the founders, local control, "limited" federal interference and a market that supplied real ongoing jobs to people.
Like I said, the city has farmed out the managing of this proposed toll road to some company in Germany. How is that creating revenue or jobs in San Antonio? The state will use their employees or contractors to build the road, they just won't manage the toll booths and such after its built. You have to have some form of national standard when it comes to building road infrastructures. If states took control of all the interstate highways, you'd start seeing things like Texas wanting Louisiana to pay to connect to their part of the road. Let's charge a 'fee' to anyone that wants to drive on a Texas highway that's doesn't have Texas plates or a Texas 'Highway Tag'. Local roads?
We have so many roads around San Antonio that have potholes the size of moon craters because the city/county doesn't have enough funding in their budget to fix them all as it is. Meter maids? We just installed those automated 'meter booths' all over downtown that spit out the tickets that you put in your windshield. They're completely doing away with the old conventional meters.
 
The problem with putting the responsibility of these critical dependencies on private firms is the corruption that comes with it. You think the Feds are corrupt? I can show you article after article about private firms that billed 10 times more than what it cost them to do a project, the execs skimming money off the top, etc. But I guess to you that's just a business finding inventive ways to "make a profit".

 
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310156
 
Like I said, the city has farmed out the managing of this proposed toll road to some company in Germany. How is that creating revenue or jobs in San Antonio? Well I doubt the company is bringing German people to run the toll booths so the jobs have to be filled by local folk. The state will use their employees or contractors to build the road, they just won't manage the toll booths and such after its built. You have to have some form of national standard when it comes to building road infrastructures. Enumerated power here "To establish Post Offices and Post Roads" If states took control of all the interstate highways, you'd start seeing things like Texas wanting Louisiana to pay to connect to their part of the road. Let's charge a 'fee' to anyone that wants to drive on a Texas highway that's doesn't have Texas plates or a Texas 'Highway Tag'. The market would address that type of situation. Would the State of Texas benefit from "locking" out commerce by doing that? I would suggest to you that people are smarter than you give credit for. Local roads?
We have so many roads around San Antonio that have potholes the size of moon craters because the city/county doesn't have enough funding in their budget to fix them all as it is. Hmmm....did you just make my point for me? Perhaps if they privatized this the roads might be in better shape because there would be some competition for the work? Meter maids? We just installed those automated 'meter booths' all over downtown that spit out the tickets that you put in your windshield. They're completely doing away with the old conventional meters.So do you see that as a good or bad thing?
 
The problem with putting the responsibility of these critical dependencies on private firms is the corruption that comes with it. You think the Feds are corrupt? I can show you article after article about private firms that billed 10 times more than what it cost them to do a project, the execs skimming money off the top, etc. But I guess to you that's just a business finding inventive ways to "make a profit".
Again, putting the control of things that deal with each state in the control of the states and its people would do better IMO to control those types of situations. Right now the state government can say "oh that is a fed problem", and no matter what the people think it is almost impossible for them to have a self governing control. All the feds do is take the state of Texas and its peoples money and use it to fund pet projects across the whole of the states. Isn't that taxation without representation? Would you ahve approved State of Texas tax revenues to be used to fund projects (read unnecessary projects) in other states and countries? Me thinks not.
 
 
slice

slice

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310156
 
Like I said, the city has farmed out the managing of this proposed toll road to some company in Germany. How is that creating revenue or jobs in San Antonio? The state will use their employees or contractors to build the road, they just won't manage the toll booths and such after its built. You have to have some form of national standard when it comes to building road infrastructures. If states took control of all the interstate highways, you'd start seeing things like Texas wanting Louisiana to pay to connect to their part of the road. Let's charge a 'fee' to anyone that wants to drive on a Texas highway that's doesn't have Texas plates or a Texas 'Highway Tag'. Local roads?
We have so many roads around San Antonio that have potholes the size of moon craters because the city/county doesn't have enough funding in their budget to fix them all as it is. Meter maids? We just installed those automated 'meter booths' all over downtown that spit out the tickets that you put in your windshield. They're completely doing away with the old conventional meters.
 
The problem with putting the responsibility of these critical dependencies on private firms is the corruption that comes with it. You think the Feds are corrupt? I can show you article after article about private firms that billed 10 times more than what it cost them to do a project, the execs skimming money off the top, etc. But I guess to you that's just a business finding inventive ways to "make a profit".

 
Most of the posts here promote fundamental principles.
 
As I read, most of your rebuttals are specific incidents that truly do not negate the fundamental principle.
IMO, your line of reasoning could easily extrapolate to "I had a flat tire once, therefore cars are bad."
It simply does not follow.
 
At least when private contractors are found corrupt, they can be prosecuted. When the Feds are found corrupt, what is the recourse?
(Tea Party comes to mind here)
 
The Federal Government has its equivalent to "making a profit". It is the ever-growing bureaucracy which fuels the inefficient use of resources (our money).
 
I simply cannot fathom the concept that sending $X to Washington, then hoping that 1/$X returns is desirable. Turning over local problems to a nameless, unelected bureaucrat 1000 miles away who has no idea of local concerns is insane.
 
When a city councilman makes a bonehead decision, at least I can walk into his office lobby with a decent chance of having my say. When the Federal Government does the same thing, the best I can do is ask for vaseline.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310156
 
Like I said, the city has farmed out the managing of this proposed toll road to some company in Germany. How is that creating revenue or jobs in San Antonio? The state will use their employees or contractors to build the road, they just won't manage the toll booths and such after its built. You have to have some form of national standard when it comes to building road infrastructures. If states took control of all the interstate highways, you'd start seeing things like Texas wanting Louisiana to pay to connect to their part of the road. Let's charge a 'fee' to anyone that wants to drive on a Texas highway that's doesn't have Texas plates or a Texas 'Highway Tag'. Local roads?
We have so many roads around San Antonio that have potholes the size of moon craters because the city/county doesn't have enough funding in their budget to fix them all as it is. Meter maids? We just installed those automated 'meter booths' all over downtown that spit out the tickets that you put in your windshield. They're completely doing away with the old conventional meters.
 
The problem with putting the responsibility of these critical dependencies on private firms is the corruption that comes with it. You think the Feds are corrupt? I can show you article after article about private firms that billed 10 times more than what it cost them to do a project, the execs skimming money off the top, etc. But I guess to you that's just a business finding inventive ways to "make a profit".

 
I can't fathom the argument of, oh we don't have enough money to build the road purely off of our tax base, so instead we need to create a toll road and charge you a dollar every time you drive down it.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310164
I can't fathom the argument of, oh we don't have enough money to build the road purely off of our tax base, so instead we need to create a toll road and charge you a dollar every time you drive down it.
That's how Texas has always used toll roads. Look at Houston. The Sam Houston Tollway/Loop would have never been built if you would've had to rely on the state to fund that massive project. The very first toll road I can remember in Texas was the Dallas/Ft. Worth Turnpike back in tthe 70's. I think it's I-30 now. They had toll booths on that stretch of road for 5 - 10 years. After the building project was completely funded, the nixed the toll booths, and the state took over the maintenance. You think they'll do that in Houston anytime soon? Shoot, I remember when the tolls on Sam Houston were $1.00. Now I think they're a $1.50. I hear they're thinking of raising them again. Why? Did the cost to build that part of the tollway just magically increase after it was completed 5 or 6 years ago? No, it's having to pay the 'management company' their fees. Like I said, it's a cash cow for the city. So Houstonians are essentially getting hit with double taxation for driving on their roads. They pay the Feds through gasoline tax, and the state through toll fees.
 
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310174
That's how Texas has always used toll roads. Look at Houston. The Sam Houston Tollway/Loop would have never been built if you would've had to rely on the state to fund that massive project. The very first toll road I can remember in Texas was the Dallas/Ft. Worth Turnpike back in tthe 70's. I think it's I-30 now. They had toll booths on that stretch of road for 5 - 10 years. After the building project was completely funded, the nixed the toll booths, and the state took over the maintenance. You think they'll do that in Houston anytime soon? Shoot, I remember when the tolls on Sam Houston were $1.00. Now I think they're a $1.50. I hear they're thinking of raising them again. Why? Did the cost to build that part of the tollway just magically increase after it was completed 5 or 6 years ago? No, it's having to pay the 'management company' their fees. Like I said, it's a cash cow for the city. So Houstonians are essentially getting hit with double taxation for driving on their roads. They pay the Feds through gasoline tax, and the state through toll fees.
 
 
It might have been funded by the State if the feds hadn't been taxing the State to death for all of the years it has and left these thing to the states.
That is the part (the fed tax) that has to go!
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310162
 
Most of the posts here promote fundamental principles.
 
As I read, most of your rebuttals are specific incidents that truly do not negate the fundamental principle.
IMO, your line of reasoning could easily extrapolate to "I had a flat tire once, therefore cars are bad."
It simply does not follow.
 
At least when private contractors are found corrupt, they can be prosecuted. When the Feds are found corrupt, what is the recourse?
(Tea Party comes to mind here)
 
The Federal Government has its equivalent to "making a profit". It is the ever-growing bureaucracy which fuels the inefficient use of resources (our money).
 
I simply cannot fathom the concept that sending $X to Washington, then hoping that 1/$X returns is desirable. Turning over local problems to a nameless, unelected bureaucrat 1000 miles away who has no idea of local concerns is insane.
 
When a city councilman makes a bonehead decision, at least I can walk into his office lobby with a decent chance of having my say. When the Federal Government does the same thing, the best I can do is ask for vaseline.
You can walk into your City Councilman's office and talk directly to him/her? That's a surprise. I've tried several times with my District Councilperson and the mayor, and could never get in the door. However, both my State Representative and Congressional Senator have had roundtable discussions either on a massive conference call, or at Town hall meetings at least twice in the last six months.
 
Letting 50 different states solely manage every needed resource to sustain their state isn't plausible. Where do you think California would be right now if they didn't get Federal assistance? You want to live in this "It's Me And My Money" kind of world, and screw everyone else that lives outside your little domain. Residents of California lose water rights, electrical power, disaster assistance, basic emergency needs? Sucks to be them. Now give me the "Well if they don't like the state they live in, they can move" mantra. Like I said about that, it would cost me THOUSANDS of dollars to pack up and move to another state, not to mention the loss of my business. It would take me a minimum of 20 years to recoup the losses, when I could just pay the extra 5% - 10% increases and stay put. That's one of the major things that has made the United States one of the most powerful and desireable places to live. Our government structure is designed so that we take care of our own. The majority of the people in this country wouldn't blink an eye at the notion of helping out another fellow American in a time of dire need (Katrina, Ike, Cali earthquakes, etc.) I guarantee you that you take for granted a myriad of Federal services that you don't even realize are being funded by the Feds. They've become so second natured that you wouldn't know how good you had it until the Feds 'pulled the plug' on those services when North Carolina seceeded from the nation. Give it a try. Let me know how it works out for you.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310175
 
It might have been funded by the State if the feds hadn't been taxing the State to death for all of the years it has and left these thing to the states.
That is the part (the fed tax) that has to go!
Sorry, doesn't work that way. The Feds aren't taxing the State, they are taxing YOU through gasoline taxes. If the state didn't get federal funds to help build the roads, then your state would increase your state taxes to offset the cost. So you're going to pay the taxes either way.
 
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310178
 
You can walk into your City Councilman's office and talk directly to him/her? That's a surprise. I've tried several times with my District Councilperson and the mayor, and could never get in the door. However, both my State Representative and Congressional Senator have had roundtable discussions either on a massive conference call, or at Town hall meetings at least twice in the last six months.
 
Letting 50 different states solely manage every needed resource to sustain their state isn't plausible. Why? Where do you think California would be right now if they didn't get Federal assistance? I think they would be in much better shape if the feds weren't taxing the to death, and the local state government officials had to be accountable to the people of the State. The oh I don't know inability, I don't care attitude of the populace in California has led them to be the let someone else take care of me, I deserve it and demand it people they are. When you letrequire this type of thinking people lose the desire to do for themselves, and allows the POWER grab that those in office take. You want to live in this "It's Me And My Money" kind of world, and screw everyone else that lives outside your little domain. Not true sir, and please don't be so pretentious to think you know what I want. I want to be able to spend the rewards of my hard work in the way I want to. What do you think churches, some of the wonderful non-profits organizations and such are doing. I do not want a government to tell me what when and where my money should go. Residents of California lose water rights, electrical power, disaster assistance, basic emergency needs? Don't you see this is because the government of California has taken over all of what you are citing and cannot possibly manage it from a centralized position! Sucks to be them. Now give me the "Well if they don't like the state they live in, they can move" mantra. I am sorry but they can change their system most importantly, if let alone by the feds, or they can move to another state where the government knows all and needs the fruits of your labor to spread out because you are too stupid to know what is needed.. Like I said about that, it would cost me THOUSANDS of dollars to pack up and move to another state, not to mention the loss of my business. It would take me a minimum of 20 years to recoup the losses, when I could just pay the extra 5% - 10% increases and stay put. That's one of the major things that has made the United States one of the most powerful and desireable places to live. Our government structure is designed so that we take care of our own. But we aren't if we keep requiringallowing the government to do so. The majority of the people in this country wouldn't blink an eye at the notion of helping out another fellow American in a time of dire need (Katrina, Ike, Cali earthquakes, etc.) I guarantee you that you take for granted a myriad of Federal services that you don't even realize are being funded by the Feds. Perhaps, but if they did not take away from me that which is not theirs to take perhaps I would not be "relying" on those things. Hmmm let's see social security, medicare, medicaid etc. They've become so second natured that you wouldn't know how good you had it until the Feds 'pulled the plug' on those services when North Carolina seceeded from the nation. Give it a try. Let me know how it works out for you.
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310179
Sorry, doesn't work that way. The Feds aren't taxing the State, they are taxing YOU through gasoline taxes. If the state didn't get federal funds to help build the roads, then your state would increase your state taxes to offset the cost. So you're going to pay the taxes either way.
 
You are correct, but it is semantics and I think you know what I meant. But if my state taxes me at least I know that the money is going to my state, not to the feds to be spread out the way they want to spread it out. Again you are making my point for me, the states are where the responsibility is here, not the feds. Then I can decide if I want to stay in the state I wish to stay in.
 
Bionc these are not things that will change in an election or even in many but are things that need to change no matter how long it takes. We have to get the fed back to where they were originally powered to be and out of the day to day operations of the states and the people. Centralized government is not how the system was set up or designed to work. States, counties, municipalities, and most importantly the people are where the power was designed to be.
 
 
fishtaco

fishtaco

Active Member
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?
Angle is the reason I can not get behind the Tea Party. Like I have said before, here is a perfect chance to get rid of a long term crook and here it comes, the Tea Party endorses someone like Angle who is unable to separate fiscal conservatism and far-right social conservatism and until that line is drawn I can not give them blanket support and O'Donnell is another good example of that. Angle did say that losing the election means it may be time to look into 2nd Amendment solutions, which means she does not support anything other than herself and those deluded enough to follow her and understands nothing about one of the things that keeps America great which is peaceful transfer of power.
 
Replacing one set of problems with another is not the answer I was hoping for, I would have been so happy if the Tea Party could have dropped the people who think Obama is a secret muslim, birther crowd/conspiracy crowd, the dominionist's, the rascists like my father-in-law who loves having Obama president as a cover to bring his rascist views to main street and anyone else who is not strictly interested in better government and honest politicians. They are giving the good people within the party a serious black eye and much fodder for MSNBC.
 
Oh yeah and if the Tea Party is actually independant, than maybe a little distance between anyone who works for FOX News would be another huge plus in getting average Americans to join.
 
Fishtaco
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/40#post_3310198
...............
Replacing one set of problems with another is not the answer I was hoping for, ..............................
 
Oh yeah and if the Tea Party is actually independant, than maybe a little distance between anyone who works for FOX News would be another huge plus in getting average Americans to join.
 
Fishtaco
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
^ This
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top