bpwallace49 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 tea party people want smaller government and lower taxes. As long as you dont reduce funding for social security, medicare/medicaid and the military. But other than the largest portions of gubmnet that we like, THEN we want smaller gubmnet. Try again indeed . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 try again. Hey I don't give two cop car chits about the OWS dirty hippies or Teatards. You are the one desperately trying to discredit this movement. So if you want to look in leftiessuck.com to find your "gotcha" then by all means have fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 As long as you dont reduce funding for social security, medicare/medicaid and the military. But other than the largest portions of gubmnet that we like, THEN we want smaller gubmnet. Try again indeed . . . i'll give you the military, but i'd hardly say that social security and medicare would be defended by the tea party. at a minimum, there would be reforms and changes to these programs to try to fix them, especially SS since it is broke. hence the idea for private accounts and such, which would contribute indeed to a smaller government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Hey I don't give two cop car chits about the OWS dirty hippies or Teatards. You are the one desperately trying to discredit this movement. So if you want to look in leftiessuck.com to find your "gotcha" then by all means have fun. i am trying to discredit it yes. desperately? no ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 (edited) tea party people want smaller government and lower taxes. Maybe originally, but now they have become whored out by the rightmost faction of the Republican party and are part of two party politics as usual political system. I don't see this happening with OWS (i.e...there won't be democratic OWS reps in congress), for a multitude of reasons, and don't' think that is necessarily a negative. You keep lambasting the OWS movement as being something without "any substance." Say what you will, but unlike the tea party, they didn't wait for "their guys" to get voted out of political power to "suddenly" and "coincidentally" start caring enough to protest. There wasn't much substance to that as much it was selective and manufactured outrage. Edited November 23, 2011 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 There wasn't much substance to that as much it was selective and manufactured outrage. interesting. i would use that exact statement in reverse when referring to OWS. believe me, it wouldn't hurt me if both went away and we took the legitimate parts of each and injected them into the political discussion via our representatives and at the ballot box. the ultimate sad part of these movements is that compromise, which should be the true skill of a politician, is lost in the face of the risk of losing the polarized base. how i long for term limits .... or more specifically, a single term limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 As long as you dont reduce funding for social security, medicare/medicaid and the military. But other than the largest portions of gubmnet that we like, THEN we want smaller gubmnet. Try again indeed . . . Are you equating the GOP half of the Congressional Super Committee with the Tea Party? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 interesting. i would use that exact statement in reverse when referring to OWS. I would say any type of movement is going to attract it's fair share of people who aren't all that educated on the issues and just want to be pissed off about something. I was simply referring to the time line for the implementation of the tea party vs. OWS. The tea party was more pro-Repub from the get go, evidenced by the not caring enough to assemble and protest pre-November 2008, when the same stuff they abhorred had been happening for years. The OWS is seemingly more pissed off at the system in general, in contrast to the tea party being mainly pissed at one political party. Again, I don't think that is a negative thing; but that seems to be the basis of what a lot of people have an issue with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 (edited) Are you equating the GOP half of the Congressional Super Committee with the Tea Party? He's talking about tea partiers are all for smaller govt. as long as spending cuts don't effect them personally. The support for medicare/SS amongst the tea party has been established for quite some time now. Edited November 23, 2011 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 He's talking about tea partiers are all for smaller govt. as long as spending cuts don't effect them personally. The support for medicare/SS amongst the tea party has been established for quite some time now. your article says that two thirds of the tea party would favor some form of a cut, does it not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 your article says that two thirds of the tea party would favor some form of a cut, does it not? No.The article states that 64% of tea partiers want govt involved in medicare and SS. It says 34 % are completely against cuts and 30 % would consider cuts if, "lawmakers must also look for other ways to help people better plan for retirement." This is a movement that is against big govt. only in certain cases. And these cases appear to be when they aren't effected personally. Here is a poll showing similar numbers from April 2011. Do you support cutting medicare or medicade...tea party 28% favor withy 70% tea partiers opposing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 No.The article states that 64% of tea partiers want govt involved in medicare and SS. It says 34 % are completely against cuts and 30 % would consider cuts if, "lawmakers must also look for other ways to help people better plan for retirement." if 34% are completely against cuts, then 66% are not, which is two thirds. given medicare and SS are government programs, i'm not sure what point you are making when you say that 64% of tea partiers would want the government involved in them. of course they are only going to want the government smaller in the way they want it smaller ... but they do indeed want it smaller, which is one of the tenets of the platform. i'm not a tea partier. i like SS and medicare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Are you equating the GOP half of the Congressional Super Committee with the Tea Party? turd hensarling is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 No.The article states that 64% of tea partiers want govt involved in medicare and SS. It says 34 % are completely against cuts and 30 % would consider cuts if, "lawmakers must also look for other ways to help people better plan for retirement." This is a movement that is against big govt. only in certain cases. And these cases appear to be when they aren't effected personally. Here is a poll showing similar numbers from April 2011. Do you support cutting medicare or medicade...tea party 28% favor withy 70% tea partiers opposing. so now you are attacking the tea party for a lack of ideological purity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 so now you are attacking the tea party for a lack of ideological purity? Are you claiming it has any? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 if 34% are completely against cuts, then 66% are not, No spinmeister. 34 are against, 30 would consider it in lieu of another govt spending program, and another 34 are a myriad of things like for cuts or undecided. 64 are for govt being involved which is obvioulsy diametrically oppopssed to being for smaller govt. How come you dont want to adress the 70 that are firmly against mediacre cuts? I had no idea you were one of those postsers here with an glaring inability to weigh in facts when it contradicts your perception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Are you claiming it has any? nope, just that bushwank's tune seems to have changed a bit. the tea party used to be "radical extremists" hell bent on ideological purity, now he is calling them poseurs for only calling for modest cuts to medicare and SS. it makes me confused as to why I am supposed to hate them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 I had no idea you were one of those postsers here with an glaring inability to weigh in facts when it contradicts your perception. Now you're just being silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Are you equating the GOP half of the Congressional Super Committee with the Tea Party? Um . . . no. And I have stated from the beginning that both teh Tea Party and OWS dont understand simple math when it comes to what they want or think they want. The really dangerous part is that while the OWS people are a temporary annoyance, Tea Party politicians actively hold office. I know you are a a member of Tea Party, so dont take it personally. But most people in the Tea party are self serving and want a personal line item veto to eliminate dangerous things like NPR and school lunches. They still want all the stuff that they want, like SS medicare/medicaid and a bloated defense, but anything they dont personally benefit from has got to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 I was watching the new Tim Taylor show last night and a quote reminded me of the Tailgate. "Your facts are really starting to pi$$ me off." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Hey I don't give two cop car chits about the OWS dirty hippies or Teatards. You are the one desperately trying to discredit this movement. So if you want to look in leftiessuck.com to find your "gotcha" then by all means have fun. I've been a member since 2005. I never had a sig line till now..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 I was watching the new Tim Taylor show last night and a quote reminded me of the Tailgate. "Your facts are really starting to pi$$ me off." you do know that 74.5 percent of all facts and statistics are made up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 No spinmeister. 34 are against, 30 would consider it in lieu of another govt spending program, and another 34 are a myriad of things like for cuts or undecided. 64 are for govt being involved which is obvioulsy diametrically oppopssed to being for smaller govt. How come you dont want to adress the 70 that are firmly against mediacre cuts? I had no idea you were one of those postsers here with an glaring inability to weigh in facts when it contradicts your perception. it is a fact that tea partiers want a smaller government. even pope's wikipedia agrees ... "The Tea Party movement is an American populist political movement that is generally recognized as conservative and libertarian, and has sponsored protests and supported political candidates since 2009. It endorses reduced government spending." i'm not saying its pure and wonderful, but you are trying to throw out confusing numbers to contradict what is indeed a fact. whether they are all united in how to get there is irrelevant to that original point. and there's no spin. if 34% are against any cuts at all, 66% would then not be. whether this is their lightening rod for a smaller government was never my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 throw out confusing numbers to contradict what is indeed a fact. whether they are all united in how to get there is irrelevant to that original point.and there's no spin. if 34% are against any cuts at all, 66% would then not be. I truly admire your stubbornness. As you'd rather pretend you don't have the rudimentary computational ability to understand what a basic set of results are really saying then ever admit to being wrong. Come to think of it, This is deja vu of all those Creationism posts. Never mind that previous comment about not being the type to concede any point that doesn't fit the perception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 I truly admire your stubbornness. As you'd rather pretend you don't have the rudimentary computational ability to understand what a basic set of results are really saying then ever admit to being wrong. Come to think of it, This is deja vu of all those Creationism posts. Never mind that previous comment about not being the type to concede any point that doesn't fit the perception. you took out my point about these numbers not being relevant to one of the stated, known tenets of the tea party movement, which was my point from the start ... but that's ok, call me a spinner. my creation posts were exploring the possibility openly. it only relates in your mind as you desperately try to come up with any zing you can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.