WorldTraveller Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Without a doubt, despite all the clumsy vetting of some of the candidates they put up in the 2010 elections, it was their energy that led to the historic 2010 mid term landslide. Shortly after the midterms, they had gone silent and as time passed it appeared that they were going to enter into the land of irrelevance. Recently, that has begun to change, we saw signs of that in some of the primary matchups in utah, Texas and Indiana . Now with this stunningly impressive showing in Wisconsin, it appears that they are back in full force. However there is a caveat, they have to feel inspired. In all the instances where they have shown their strength, there was a perceived conservative cause or candidate and on the surface, mitt Romney doesn't fit the stereotypical tea party hero. However, defeating Obama and supporting tea party candidates in swing states may do the trick for governor Romney . I was very impressed with their efforts, they reportedly made over a million phone calls for governor walker, knocked on thousands of doors and proved that they are a force to reckon with. What's most impressive is that they outperformed expectations and that they reinforced the idea that there is a "silent majority" that still exists and my hunch is that come November, if the polls show a dead heat in some of the crucial swing states that they will outperform again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Exactly! To inspire Americans... You gotta getta them to hate... Right now the GOP is peaking and will be. This very thing brought beloved Barry into office in 2008. Peaking won't swing to the dems until they get engergized by their own hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Exactly! To inspire Americans... You gotta getta them to hate... Right now the GOP is peaking and will be. This very thing brought beloved Barry into office in 2008. Peaking won't swing to the dems until they get engergized by their own hate. How sad for you.......................whether you believe that BS or you're just repeating it. There is no Hate involved in the Taxed Enough Already movement, but, it is repeated and repeated (and repeated) by those who cannot accept that there is another way of thinking than their own. the participants must be (falsely) demonized as racists, or ignorant, or "lackeys of corporations"...........................anything that will "explain" away the fading power of liberalism. Any bad example that is seen by a few people out of the millions that are working towards reining in the continuing, expanding reach of the government into the lives of its "free" citizens, is quickly latched upon as "proof" about the TEA party. again, its too bad for you. One would hope that changewill do you good. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) How sad for you.......................whether you believe that BS or you're just repeating it. There is no Hate involved in the Taxed Enough Already movement, but, it is repeated and repeated (and repeated) by those who cannot accept that there is another way of thinking than their own. the participants must be (falsely) demonized as racists, or ignorant, or "lackeys of corporations"...........................anything that will "explain" away the fading power of liberalism. Any bad example that is seen by a few people out of the millions that are working towards reining in the continuing, expanding reach of the government into the lives of its "free" citizens, is quickly latched upon as "proof" about the TEA party. again, its too bad for you. One would hope that changewill do you good. . We all want to enjoy modern society and are taxed too much? Where do you think this is gonna lead. The ones squawking are most likely the ones least in need of help. Edited June 7, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) All the TEA party needs to do is elect people who go to Congress ready to cooperate and learn to compromise an issue without compromising themselves. Until the rhetoric relaxes...they'll be seen as radicals from the 70% of America that would actually like to see the country move in the right direction. Or even just move. Of course, the 15% extremists on either side will prevent that b/c this is the land of the free...most TEA party people should understand that they've gotten a lot of what they wanted...including marginalizing almost everything the President tries to do. Edited June 7, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) All the TEA party needs to do is elect people who go to Congress ready to cooperate and learn to compromise an issue without compromising themselves. Until the rhetoric relaxes...they'll be seen as radicals from the 70% of America that would actually like to see the country move in the right direction. Or even just move. Of course, the 15% extremists on either side will prevent that b/c this is the land of the free...most TEA party people should understand that they've gotten a lot of what they wanted...including marginalizing almost everything the President tries to do. I agree... The worst sin you can commit is "to have it my way only!" Yet there is no compromise with some people because they think they have it hard and their lifestyle has/is taken/ing a hit. I wish they would worry more about putting people on their level AND beyond by lifting up while tearing the ones that are uber-ahead down. Edited June 7, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 We all want to enjoy modern society and are taxed too much? Where do you think this is gonna lead. The ones squawking are most likely the ones least in need of help. You must be talking about Clinton, right? Because he just came out and said we're being taxed enough already right now and we need to extend the Obama tax cuts. So you must be talking about Clinton. That's how I'm reading this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I agree... The worst sin you can commit is "to have it my way only!" Yet there is no compromise with some people because they think they have it hard and their lifestyle has/is taken/ing a hit. I wish they would worry more about putting people on their level AND beyond by lifting up while tearing the ones that are uber-ahead down. I think this is where the disconnect comes in. I don't understand why you have to tear someone down to build someone else up. The hate part sounds like projection. I see people, most of whom have looked at the evidence and drawn a logical conclusion that generally freer markets create the best standard of living for the most people. You look at the evidence and draw a different, but possibly also logical conclusion (I'd have to hear your theory & reasoning to be sure). But why do these people have to be fueled by hate? Why do they have to be villified? Why can't you simply point out the flaws in their economic theory instead of going after their presumed character & motives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I think this is where the disconnect comes in. I don't understand why you have to tear someone down to build someone else up. It's the co-dependent progressive way. Why try to motivate people to earn more when you can just force those who earn more to make less. When everyone is poor, no one is poor. Sounds fair to a progressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) Why can't you simply point out the flaws in their economic theory instead of going after their presumed character & motives? I can't speak for him but I would assume his angst comes from the politics not the economic theory. And not the politics/passion on the street...but the stonewalling in the house and the bolstering the movement gives to imply that the people (as a whole) approve of that. Edited June 7, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You must be talking about Clinton, right? Because he just came out and said we're being taxed enough already right now and we need to extend the Obama tax cuts. So you must be talking about Clinton. That's how I'm reading this. Again and again... Could care less what Clinton says... I never voted for him and I THINK HE IS WRONG. I think this is where the disconnect comes in. I don't understand why you have to tear someone down to build someone else up. The hate part sounds like projection. I see people, most of whom have looked at the evidence and drawn a logical conclusion that generally freer markets create the best standard of living for the most people. You look at the evidence and draw a different, but possibly also logical conclusion (I'd have to hear your theory & reasoning to be sure). But why do these people have to be fueled by hate? Why do they have to be villified? Why can't you simply point out the flaws in their economic theory instead of going after their presumed character & motives? The military does it all the time... We have unified fighting force? I can't speak for him but I would assume his angst comes from the politics not the economic theory. And not the politics/passion on the street...but the stonewalling in the house and the bolstering the movements gives to imply that the people (as a whole) approve of that. Which in turn is doing the wrong thing... We are really fracturing as a country... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) I can't speak for him but I would assume his angst comes from the politics not the economic theory. And not the politics/passion on the street...but the stonewalling in the house and the bolstering the movement gives to imply that the people (as a whole) approve of that. I don't think "Stonewalling", at least used as a pejorative, is a fair criticism. When the other side has an aggressive agenda you are opposed to the only way to check that is by standing together; to do otherwise is to roll over. It has an essential functional value purposefully written into the structure of the constitution to prevent too much from happening too fast. And it worked. The other side got plenty of its agenda through but the Republicans holding ground kept it from getting passed through as haphazardly, aggressively, or rapidly as it otherwise would have. If the shoe were on the other foot the Dems would, and should, do the same thing. Edited June 7, 2012 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) I don't think "Stonewalling", at least used as a pejorative, is a fair criticism. When the other side has an aggressive agenda you are opposed to the only way to check that is by standing together; to do otherwise is to roll over. It has an essential functional value purposefully written into the structure of the constitution to prevent too much from happening too fast. And it worked. The other side got plenty of its agenda through but the Republicans holding ground kept it from getting passed through as haphazardly, aggressively, or rapidly as it otherwise would have. If the shoe were on the other foot the Dems would, and should, do the same thing. Please spread the word to the angry (not that you are one of them). If anything though...it's been too extreme...more extreme than anything we've had and the overall consequences have broken Washington to all of our detriment including the TEA party themselves. Edited June 7, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I am all for the Republicans getting in... Afterall, they are the ones (under Bush) that made my gov't job untouchable/contractable! Go Republican Teabaggers! Still doesn't make it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Please spread the word to the angry (not that you are one of them). If anything though...it's been too extreme...more extreme than anything we've had and the overall consequences have broken Washington to all of our detriment including the TEA party themselves. You mean all the TEA party angry rallies that ended in full riots after the police had to step in and evict them from the public parks across the nation after they shat on police cars, raped women, endangered children, and urinated in public? Those angry people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You mean all the TEA party angry rallies that ended in full riots after the police had to step in and evict them from the public parks across the nation after they shat on police cars, raped women, endangered children, and urinated in public? Those angry people? You are right... The Baggers would never do that stuff! Why? They got TOO MUCH TO LOSE. Just the sort of people who need to be taxed MORE, not less. Just don't go out to a bar or dinner with one off them... You will end up picking up the whole tab and more after these clowns cry poor mouth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted June 7, 2012 Author Share Posted June 7, 2012 I can't speak for him but I would assume his angst comes from the politics not the economic theory. And not the politics/passion on the street...but the stonewalling in the house and the bolstering the movement gives to imply that the people (as a whole) approve of that. Could it be that they were elected on a soecific mandate? A mandate to keep taxes lower and slash spending. That is what they ran on and that is why they were elected, to do just that and not eventually morph into the typical rrepublican who breaks his promise and spends just like the liberal. Thy weren't elected on a mandate to compromise in these issues, that's where you and many others get it wrong, you believe that they' should pretend that that what they ran on should be forgotten or that it never existed. I'm sorry new bills , right or wrong this is what they were elected to do. I am under the belief that elected officials should carry through with their campaign promises, and they will be judged by their convictions the following elections, and if they don't follow through with those promises then the primary process will hold their feet to the fire. Please spread the word to the angry (not that you are one of them). If anything though...it's been too extreme...more extreme than anything we've had and the overall consequences have broken Washington to all of our detriment including the TEA party themselves. What s "extreme" is the status quo of the level of spending from both on the federal and state level. What is extreme is not reforming our entitlement programs. People live in their cozy insulated worlds, and live under these extreme conditions, and since we live in it day to day, we believe that it's just normal, and anything to shake up these insane policies is somehow extreme. It's odd how people who promote fiscal sanity and keeping more of their own money through lower taxes has become extreme, yet spending much more money than we have is somehow acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You are right... The Baggers would never do that stuff! Why? They got TOO MUCH TO LOSE. Just the sort of people who need to be taxed MORE, not less. Just don't go out to a bar or dinner with one off them... You will end up picking up the whole tab and more after these clowns cry poor mouth! Well I speculated in post #3 whether or not this particular BS was a strategy or ignorance, it is clearly the latter. There is no apparent understanding of the movement to (at least) slow the expansion of the government here, simply cliches and misconceptions. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 You are right... The Baggers would never do that stuff! Why? They got TOO MUCH TO LOSE. Just the sort of people who need to be taxed MORE, not less. Just don't go out to a bar or dinner with one off them... You will end up picking up the whole tab and more after these clowns cry poor mouth! Don't bother with them. They don't want to hear the truth, like when democracy died on tuesday night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Exactly! To inspire Americans... You gotta getta them to hate... Right now the GOP is peaking and will be. This very thing brought beloved Barry into office in 2008. Peaking won't swing to the dems until they get engergized by their own hate. Can't argue with that, and it generally works against the incumbant party. There are plenty of Bush Derangement Syndrome nuts still around, but will they be able to inspire the college kiddies, welfare bums and independants like they did in 2008? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts