It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOP and Tea: not meant to be?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   
GOPers chant ‘fire him’ at RSC staffer


House Republicans on Wednesday morning were calling for the firing of Republican Study Committee staffers after they were caught sending e-mails to conservative groups urging them to pressure GOP lawmakers to vote against a debt proposal from Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

Infuriated by the e-mails from Paul Teller, the executive director of the RSC, and other staffers, members started chanting “Fire him, fire him!” while Teller stood silently at a closed-door meetings of House Republicans.

“It was an unbelievable moment,” said one GOP insider. “I’ve never seen anything like it.”



It is almost unbelievable that Republican congressmen would lash out at one of the largest GOP organizations in such a manner, practically calling for their heads. The RSC is a very conservative committee and it had sent out emails calling on conservative groups to pressure Republicans into not voting for a bill created by their own leader, Speaker Boehner.

Then we get this: Tea Party leader: Boehner must go


Tea Party Nation leader Judson Phillips called on House Speaker John Boehner "to go" and be replaced by a "Tea Party Speaker of the House" in a blog post Wednesday morning, the same day that Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, said that her group was looking into the same idea.

"Now Boehner is in the process of surrendering again. He is surrendering not to [President] Obama, but to the status quo in Washington," Phillips wrote. "The House passed Cut, Cap and Balance, which would cut $111 billion from the budget. It would cap spending and set a good course for the future."


The Tea Party is now mounting pressure for Republican leadership to be removed, specifically John Boehner, as they see him as the great sell-out. With about 80 Republicans being Tea Partiers it would not be easy for them to take the position of power but this reminds you almost of a pre-coup d’état atmosphere, a near civil war within the GOP over its direction, ideology, and composition.

But wait, that is not all: Boehner: ‘A Lot’ Of Republicans Want To Force Default, Create ‘Enough Chaos’ To Pass Balanced Budget Amendment


Speaking on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show this morning, Boehner agreed that failing to raise the limit before the deadline would be devastating, and said the “chaos” plan won’t work when asked by Ingraham what’s motivating the recalcitrant Republicans:

BOEHNER: Well, first they want more. And my goodness, I want more too. And secondly, a lot of them believe that if we get past August the second and we have enough chaos, we could force the Senate and the White House to accept a balanced budget amendment. I’m not sure that that — I don’t think that that strategy works. Because I think the closer we get to August the second, frankly, the less leverage we have vis a vis our colleagues in the Senate and the White House.




So we have the Tea Party furious at Boehner for not doing exactly as they say when they say it and trying to hash out a deal (a horrible one I might add) with the President. They do not believe he is as committed to fiscally conservative principles as they are so it is their intention to call him out and possibly challenge him on it. Then we can add to that Boehner is hitting back by saying the Tea Partiers want us to default so as to create chaos where they could then push through their agenda, which is exactly what the Democrats have been saying. And you can top that off with Moderate Republicans yelling at an RSC staffer demanding resignations over the emails sent out calling for a conservative fight against their own Speaker’s debt proposal bill.

Sounds like trouble in paradise. I can only imagine how much worse this infighting will be if we do not raise the debt ceiling by August 2nd. Not only could we face a default and downgrade of our credit rating (the downgrade is a guarantee) but the GOP could literally implode. And what if the debt ceiling is raised by Boehner and Moderate Republicans voting for a bipartisan measure which the Tea Party despises? They would obviously want heads to roll.

It appears to me Boehner and McConnell are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Any wrong move and the party could literally split in half.
edit on 7/27/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Nothing wrong with the Tea Party expressing their beliefs and fighting for their political ideals after all that's what our country is based on and what makes us great as opposed to places like Libya where political parties seperate from Ghaddafi's result in public executions.

The Tea Party is about as republican as Ron Paul is. They agree with alot but like how Paul is focused on the Fed the Tea Party is focused on spending, it's just their thing. I for one think it's great wwe are getting differences of opinions within the parties as it gives voters more choices.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
One big circus playing out in front of the world.

Maybe they should look up the word COMPROMISE and replace the my way or highway attitude.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


Why should they? It's their right to express any views they choose and if they are adamant on certain issues and it costs them elections that's their decision. I don't think you should say how political organizations should think.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
One big circus playing out in front of the world.

Maybe they should look up the word COMPROMISE and replace the my way or highway attitude.


just like dems "compromised" for a partisan vote for obama care?

Tea party members were voted in for one major reason: because establishment members on both sides of the aisle keep screwing everything up.

Whether it effects us next week or 5 years from now, our debt is out of control, our government is too big and spends irresponsibly, and the bubble is going to pop.

And not only that, but pretty much every plan proposed so far in the past few weeks still means 10+T more debt in the next decade, regardless of how much they are saying to "cut" in the timeframe.

4T in cuts over a decade? 1T? 2T? lol, with 1.6T per year spend in deficit, they should be saying "we'll owe 25% less on upcoming debt" not whatever fake cuts they try to propose.
edit on 27-7-2011 by SlasherOfVeils because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by jam321
 


Why should they? It's their right to express any views they choose and if they are adamant on certain issues and it costs them elections that's their decision. I don't think you should say how political organizations should think.



I disagree. If there is no compromise only the farthest left or right ideas will survive. There must be compromise or the left or the right have to give up, get killed or otherwise walk away and none of those are options.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by jam321
 


Why should they? It's their right to express any views they choose and if they are adamant on certain issues and it costs them elections that's their decision. I don't think you should say how political organizations should think.



Because "my way or the highway" is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


This is why you don't see powerful third party's in Americas political system. In order for a third party to have a platform different enough to seperate them from the democrats or republicans they are forced to take stong stances on issues or else they will fall under the umbrella of either of the two major parties. If the Tea Party doesn't make a stand on issues they are just republicans.

The major parties will compromise but the third party's simply can't or else they lose the ideology that seperates them.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by jam321
 


Why should they? It's their right to express any views they choose and if they are adamant on certain issues and it costs them elections that's their decision. I don't think you should say how political organizations should think.



Because "my way or the highway" is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship.


had our founding fathers compromised with england back 300 years ago, our nation wouldn't even exist at all.

Glad atleast a few people voted into office stand for what they were voted in for.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SlasherOfVeils
 


This would have been good and a great plan if you noticed this when the spending was happening.
You don't say after the fact "hey kids we spent too much so now we are cutting the electric off."



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by jam321
 


Why should they? It's their right to express any views they choose and if they are adamant on certain issues and it costs them elections that's their decision. I don't think you should say how political organizations should think.



Because "my way or the highway" is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship.


Your not realizing that our Constitution allows any type of party to run even if they promote a dictatorship. Just because you don't like it doesn't give you the right to tell others what to do.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 





Why should they?


How bout in the interest of America?




if they are adamant on certain issues and it costs them elections that's their decision.


There may be a whole lot more on the line than just elections. What good is it them fighting for everything they believe in only to end up with a giant collapse just because they were unwilling to compromise?



I don't think you should say how political organizations should think.


So the Tea party has a right to express their views, but I don't. :shk:



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Thats exactly what should be happening.

"Hey whitehouse, you spent too much, going to shred your credit cards till you can sustain yourself again"

If you go on vacation and spend all your savings, max out your credit cards, and forgot to pay your cellphone and cable bills, guess what, no cellphone and cable till you learn how to save and spend your money responsibly.

If you get a car loan for a 70k skyline when you can't foot the bill, it gets taken away.

its going to hurt, and hurt bad, but it will be less painful if we default now, not when we double our debt down the road and leave it to our kids to deal with.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Oh look, it's the daily thread attacking the tea party / republicans.

Grasp that the tea party was originally a noble movement supported by well-meaning citizens who believed in things like freedom. Then it quickly got co-opted by the neocons. So now you have confused well-meaning people supporting a movement co-opted by corrupt politicians -- of course you will have the type of schizophrenic conflicts described.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


The Tea Party isn't telling you what to think or do but you are to them. They have a right as free individuals to pursue any stance in politics they like. If the people don't like it they will vote them out or not vote them in in the first place. I also don't see the Tea Party with enough influence to dictate legislation yet unless i'm mistaken on that.

Alot of people on here whine about the two party system but then complain when it looks like there might be a third party acting different from the other two parties. Why have third parties if you expect them to act like the republicans or democrats?



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


see this thread pertains to your latest thread.

no matter how much lip stick you put on a pig its still a pig and the government has become a bloated 4000 pound pig and the trough has run dry.

so you know what to do when all the food for the pig(cash) has run out?

serve the pig up as bacon or pork chops and get your knives and forks ready to take a big bite out it and pass the salt.
edit on 28-7-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SlasherOfVeils
 





just like dems "compromised" for a partisan vote for obama care?


Yep, let's keep playing the tit for tat game. Who cares who did what in the past? The issue is about NOW and all 535 members, not parties, should make a compromise.




Whether it effects us next week or 5 years from now, our debt is out of control, our government is too big and spends irresponsibly, and the bubble is going to pop.


Are you ready to raise that white flag?




And not only that, but pretty much every plan proposed so far in the past few weeks still means 10+T more debt in the next decade, regardless of how much they are saying to "cut" in the timeframe.


And the Tea Party was elected WHY?(see below)




Tea party members were voted in for one major reason: because establishment members on both sides of the aisle keep screwing everything up.


Where is their plan since all the others are so screwed up?



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
First is a GOP proposal to cut Social Security and what follows is response from an anonymous farmer.


Deficit commission’s Simpson calls US seniors the ‘greediest generation’
Wyoming Republican Alan Simpson has a pretty low opinion of the people that have paid into Social Security all their lives and now need something back.
The co-chair of President Barack Obama's bipartisan deficit commission lashed out at seniors Wednesday because they are unhappy with his ideas for reducing the deficit by cutting Social Security benefits while reducing corporate taxes.



"Hey Alan, let's get a few things straight..

1. As a career politician, you have been on the public tit for FIFTY YEARS.

2.. I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63).

3 My Social Security payments, and those of millions of other Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account and give OUR money to a bunch of zero ambition losers in return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and turning Social Security into a Ponzi scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud.

4. Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown, you and your ilk pulled the proverbial football away from millions of American seniors nearing retirement and moved the goalposts for full retirement from age 65 to age 67. NOW, you and your shill commission are proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN.

5. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying into Medicare from Day One, and now you morons propose to change the rules of the game ... Why? Because you idiots mismanaged other parts of the economy to such an extent that you need to steal money from Medicare to pay the bills.

6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why? Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money.

Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt.
To add insult to injury, you label us "greedy" for calling "bullsht" on your incompetence.

Well, Captain Bullsht, I have a few questions for YOU.

1. How much money have you earned from the American taxpayers during your pathetic 50-year political career?

2. At what age did you retire from your pathetic political career, and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from the American taxpayers?

3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?

4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or, as usual, have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?

It is you, Captain Bullsht, and your political co-conspirators called Congress who are the "greedy" ones.
It is you and your fellow nutcases who have bankrupted America and stolen the American dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers.

And for what?
Votes. That's right, sir.

You and yours have bankrupted America for the sole purpose of advancing your pathetic political careers.
You know it, we know it, and you know that we know it."

-Anonymous Farmer



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by SlasherOfVeils
 





its going to hurt, and hurt bad, but it will be less painful if we default now, not when we double our debt down the road and leave it to our kids to deal with.



I don't have kids so you can save that argument. I want mine now.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:11 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 





Alot of people on here whine about the two party system but then complain when it looks like there might be a third party acting different from the other two parties. Why have third parties if you expect them to act like the republicans or democrats?


You act as though I am saying the Tea Party should just shut up and know their role. I'm not. They can voice their opinion and if persuasive can get a piece of their view into the legislation.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join