Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Contrary to what some 'tea parties' put out, there is no central 'core' beliefs. What many at tea parties do feel is that:It's only been stated by CG ad infinitum since she's been here.
No let's hear you do it.
List 3, just 3, significant position differences between a consensus in the GOP and a consensus among Tea Partiers. In other words 3 positions that most GOP'ers support that most Tea Partiers do not.
Just 3, shouldn't take you a minute. Then you can link to that post whenever someone repeats the question.
Just 3.
1. government is too big, grown to an unsustainable and oppressive size by the representatives of both parties. The difference is in degrees, meaning the speed of growth.
2. government needs to be shrunk back to its stated responsibilities in the constitution. Neither major party have shown any propensity towards such.
3. government should work for the people, not the other way around. Meaning the laws should protect life, liberties, and property. That is not what has been happening for nearly a decade, indeed more of our property rights are being confiscated without available redress.
Just for fun, exactly how do YOU know what I did or did not say about Bush? Fucking idiot. Grasp one single solitary concept, zona.... I am an individual.... just because the left practice 'group think' does not mean that everyone does.
I am not 'you guys', I am me. At the risk of repeating myself.... Fucking Idiot.
Oh, please!!! You are exactly like every other right wing idiot. There is nothing different or special about you. So stop fooling yourself and stop TRYING to fool others. You're just one of the bunch, dearie.
Now, here is something that no one will see me say very often.
Fuck off and die in a ditch, bitch. I haven't forgotten.
Eliminiate???? Federal Government Programs????
OMG Every Single One is Vital to Preserving the Home of The Brave!!
To balance the Federal budget, I'd suggest simply spending less than the Feds bring in.
I know, pretty wild and crazy.
Their responses are like the general public’s in many ways. Most describe the amount they paid in taxes this year as “fair.” Most send their children to public schools. A plurality do not think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president, and, despite their push for smaller government, they think that Social Security and Medicare are worth the cost to taxpayers. They actually are just as likely as Americans as a whole to have returned their census forms, though some conservative leaders have urged a boycott.
All seem perfectly reasonable to me.
Contract FROM America
1 Protect the Constitution
2 Reject Cap & Trade
3 Demand a Balanced Budget
4 Enact Fundamental Tax Reform
5 Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington
6 End Runaway Government Spending
7 Defund, Repeal & Replace Government-run Health Care
8 Pass an 'All of the Above' Energy Policy
9 Stop the Pork
10 Stop the Tax Hikes
Its very vague.
On limiting government, tell us how much of social security, medicare, veterans affairs and defense you want to cut since those account for 70% of the federal government. Throw in interest on the debt - can't cut that - and that's 75%. Social programs and welfare are 15% and everything else is 10%. Total revenues are currently about 60% of spending, meaning you would have to cut 40% of the total budget. So, since you are for balancing the budget, what do you suggest we eliminate?
Contrary to what some 'tea parties' put out, there is no central 'core' beliefs. What many at tea parties do feel is that:It's only been stated by CG ad infinitum since she's been here.
No let's hear you do it.
List 3, just 3, significant position differences between a consensus in the GOP and a consensus among Tea Partiers. In other words 3 positions that most GOP'ers support that most Tea Partiers do not.
Just 3, shouldn't take you a minute. Then you can link to that post whenever someone repeats the question.
Just 3.
1. government is too big, grown to an unsustainable and oppressive size by the representatives of both parties. The difference is in degrees, meaning the speed of growth.
2. government needs to be shrunk back to its stated responsibilities in the constitution. Neither major party have shown any propensity towards such.
3. government should work for the people, not the other way around. Meaning the laws should protect life, liberties, and property. That is not what has been happening for nearly a decade, indeed more of our property rights are being confiscated without available redress.
Odd. How can these people speak for the tea party when Xeno has been bitching at me for months that there are no tea party leaders?
Now YOU take a flying leap. I'm not your monkey. You asked for something, I gave it to you. Didn't your momma ever tell you that actions speak louder than words? GOP should have learned that lesson, they didn't.Contrary to what some 'tea parties' put out, there is no central 'core' beliefs. What many at tea parties do feel is that:No let's hear you do it.
List 3, just 3, significant position differences between a consensus in the GOP and a consensus among Tea Partiers. In other words 3 positions that most GOP'ers support that most Tea Partiers do not.
Just 3, shouldn't take you a minute. Then you can link to that post whenever someone repeats the question.
Just 3.
1. government is too big, grown to an unsustainable and oppressive size by the representatives of both parties. The difference is in degrees, meaning the speed of growth.
2. government needs to be shrunk back to its stated responsibilities in the constitution. Neither major party have shown any propensity towards such.
3. government should work for the people, not the other way around. Meaning the laws should protect life, liberties, and property. That is not what has been happening for nearly a decade, indeed more of our property rights are being confiscated without available redress.
Now show us where the Republican party does not support those principles.
btw, why do Tea Partiers by 2 to 1 support Medicare and Social Security? Is there any semblance of a consensus among Tea Partiers to cut defense spending?
...given that, where will this smaller government come from?
Foxfire, You are not the final arbitor of what the constitutiomn says.
That is the job of the SCOTUS.
They have already decided that one and the law ofd the land is the gerneral wealfare allows it.
You are speaking with an authority you dont own.
Odd. How can these people speak for the tea party when Xeno has been bitching at me for months that there are no tea party leaders?
The Contract from America initiative was developed within the decentralized tea party and 912 movements. Ryan Hecker, a Houston Tea Party Society activist, developed the concept of creating a grassroots-generated call for reform prior to the April 15, 2009 Tax Day Tea Party rallies.
About Us
All seem perfectly reasonable to me.
Contract FROM America
1 Protect the Constitution
2 Reject Cap & Trade
3 Demand a Balanced Budget
4 Enact Fundamental Tax Reform
5 Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington
6 End Runaway Government Spending
7 Defund, Repeal & Replace Government-run Health Care
8 Pass an 'All of the Above' Energy Policy
9 Stop the Pork
10 Stop the Tax Hikes
Its very vague.
On limiting government, tell us how much of social security, medicare, veterans affairs and defense you want to cut since those account for 70% of the federal government. Throw in interest on the debt - can't cut that - and that's 75%. Social programs and welfare are 15% and everything else is 10%. Total revenues are currently about 60% of spending, meaning you would have to cut 40% of the total budget. So, since you are for balancing the budget, what do you suggest we eliminate?
This wasn't directed to me, but if I may. . . .
The national defense is constitutionally mandated, but it could be pared back to its constitutional intent by eliminating the graft and corruption inherent in contracts and other favors that Congress directs to favored constituents. A Congress interested in returning to constitutional roots would begin the process to do that.
.Social programs should not be the prerogative of the Federal government as there is no Constitutional authority for them Its decided law A Congress interested in returning to constitutional roots would recognize that you can't just dump the programs without creating unconscionable hardship on people those programs have made dependent. But we could start the slow process of phasing out those we don't have to have and transferring the rest to the states where they properly belong. We don't have to just allow them to continue to grow and fester in their current unsustainable state.
Once you remove the Federal government's ability to buy votes by dispensing favored status or gifts to anybody, you would be surprised how much less money it would require to run the Federal government at all levels.
You say this now, but here is what makes you a hack, YOU DIDNT SAY A WORD DURING BUSH'S HELL ON EARTH FOR 8 YEARS. Not a fucking word.
All of a sudden, you guys have "had enough". ALL OF A SUDDEN.
Just for fun, exactly how do YOU know what I did or did not say about Bush? Fucking idiot. Grasp one single solitary concept, zona.... I am an individual.... just because the left practice 'group think' does not mean that everyone does.
I am not 'you guys', I am me. At the risk of repeating myself.... Fucking Idiot.
You start a thread about what the Tea Party thinks, as a group, and then you ridicule the left with a charge of 'groupthink'?
Very funny. And yes we know you supported Bush. We know who are and who you were in the past.
Its very vague.
On limiting government, tell us how much of social security, medicare, veterans affairs and defense you want to cut since those account for 70% of the federal government. Throw in interest on the debt - can't cut that - and that's 75%. Social programs and welfare are 15% and everything else is 10%. Total revenues are currently about 60% of spending, meaning you would have to cut 40% of the total budget. So, since you are for balancing the budget, what do you suggest we eliminate?
This wasn't directed to me, but if I may. . . .
The national defense is constitutionally mandated, but it could be pared back to its constitutional intent by eliminating the graft and corruption inherent in contracts and other favors that Congress directs to favored constituents. A Congress interested in returning to constitutional roots would begin the process to do that.
.Social programs should not be the prerogative of the Federal government as there is no Constitutional authority for them Its decided law A Congress interested in returning to constitutional roots would recognize that you can't just dump the programs without creating unconscionable hardship on people those programs have made dependent. But we could start the slow process of phasing out those we don't have to have and transferring the rest to the states where they properly belong. We don't have to just allow them to continue to grow and fester in their current unsustainable state.
Once you remove the Federal government's ability to buy votes by dispensing favored status or gifts to anybody, you would be surprised how much less money it would require to run the Federal government at all levels.
Please realise you lost this debate long ago
Oh, please!!! You are exactly like every other right wing idiot. There is nothing different or special about you. So stop fooling yourself and stop TRYING to fool others. You're just one of the bunch, dearie.
Now, here is something that no one will see me say very often.
Fuck off and die in a ditch, bitch. I haven't forgotten.
Don't be so modest. I've heard you say a lot worse. And what is it you haven't forgotten?? How to act like a decent human being???
NO decided law means that it has been desided by our countrys highest court and you lost.
I ONLY put in its decided law and did it in a different color for all to see.
NO decided law means that it has been desided by our countrys highest court and you lost.
I ONLY put in its decided law and did it in a different color for all to see.
You did not identify my changed post as a change that you did. You did it in a dishonest and unethical way.Nope people on here do it all the time, No one thought you wrote that and you know it
I know what 'decided law' means and it can apply in the lowest to the highest court. And there is no such thing as 'decided' law that is final as any law can be changed even if it requires a Constitutional amendment to do it.It is what the SCOTUS is for
Now then, if you have no argument smarter than pretending the Supreme Court is God and/or I am not allowed to have opinions, please find something else to do.
NO decided law means that it has been desided by our countrys highest court and you lost.
I ONLY put in its decided law and did it in a different color for all to see.
You did not identify my changed post as a change that you did. You did it in a dishonest and unethical way.Nope people on here do it all the time, No one thought you wrote that and you know it
I know what 'decided law' means and it can apply in the lowest to the highest court. And there is no such thing as 'decided' law that is final as any law can be changed even if it requires a Constitutional amendment to do it.It is what the SCOTUS is for
Now then, if you have no argument smarter than pretending the Supreme Court is God and/or I am not allowed to have opinions, please find something else to do.
They are the final arbitors of the laws of this land being in line with the constitution.
Its decided law.
You can pretend you can overturn these decisions but you are just fooling yourself.
