Does the Tea party want to deliberately crash the U.S. economy?+

beezzer

Sometimes, forcing the issue is the only way.

I am not sure about it at all. I think there might be more backlash aimed at TP than democrats. They control a much larger percentage of the media than conservatives do, and especially against TP.

The only real TP sources I have found are dailypaul and infowars. I consider fox news liberal/progressive.

It might have been wiser to let obozo get his way, then level him with impeachment charges as soon as debt limit is raised.

reply to post by beezzer


Not only true on the face of the issue but particularly in this case. But even more so, can anybody really believe that we the people are going to dislodge the politicians from their cushy jobs and arrangements on both sides of the aisle with big business, oil, pharm., insurance and banking without a real push?

EarthCitizen07

beezzer

Sometimes, forcing the issue is the only way.

I am not sure about it at all. I think there might be more backlash aimed at TP than democrats. They control a much larger percentage of the media than conservatives do, and especially against TP.

The only real TP sources I have found are dailypaul and infowars. I consider fox news liberal/progressive.

It might have been wiser to let obozo get his way, then level him with impeachment charges as soon as debt limit is raised.

????? You think that Faux News is liberal? Seriously?

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


I exaggerated a bit. They are neoconservative rather than traditional conservative. Neoconservatives and neoliberals are both globalist scum with slightly different twist. There isnt that much difference between the two.

Libertarianism is a mixture of traditional conservatism and traditional liberalism. Socially liberal and financially conservative.

Time to get rid of the NEOs.

sonnny1

solomons path


BTW - I'm a libertarian, but I'm not a TEA party member . . .

Kudos.

I respect the Tea Party though.

I respect the sentiment by citizens in the Tea party that the government needs to be run by the people again and not big business. I know they are well intention-ed and think they are doing the right thing. But I am concerned that people like the Koch brothers have Tea party politicians on a leash. They have superimposed their agenda on the agenda of the Tea party. The Democratic Leadership council is the same by the way. The DLC are globalists who are loyal to corporations and the ultra wealthy.Hillary Clinton is a big globalist and has been on the side of outsourcing in documented instances. I am worried that almost any grassroots organization with an objective of taking on government and unseating those politicians not representing the people, is being compromised by these people, a cabal of billionaires and millionaires who are perverting groups like the Tea party into being a vehicle for dismantling government to allow predatory capitalism to thrive even more than it has. If you look into who has been bankrolling the Tea party it is being funded by big tobacco and the Koch brothers. Phillip Morris started involvment originally to try to reign in excise taxes on tobacco, The Koch brothers largely because they want to use Tea party politicians to initiate deregulations that affect their empire. Its a deal with the devil(s) it seems.

reply to post by buster2010



You're part right....

Obamacare is being used a a scapegoat for greedy insurance companies and greedy employers that want to maximize profit.

But ObamaCare *IS* doing damage

"Obamacare hasn't done any damage."

And......

Obama's federal spending is lower than previous administrations so the everything he does to contribute to a crash remark makes no sense.

Obama has been and *IS* spending much more.

Look at the numbers below the column called *SPENDING*
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The short answer is yes. For the most part the "tea party members" are uneducated rubes that are used by those that control them through the use of fear, bigotry and racism.

First thing that happens In this type of scheam is those with enough money and influence decide what it is they want in the long term, they then enlist the rubes of the right to be their ATM machine and foot soldiers. It has been a very sucseeful plan that was brought to bare against the country when they ushered Raygun into office.

The latest incantation is the tea party financed and brought into being by the Koch brothers. It is unfortunate that the rank and file of the right think they on their own and with no outside money started this movement.

The sad part is the majority of those who think a government default is a good thing will probably suffer the most. The average tea parties is unfortunately not smart enough to know the intricacies of how the government works. The see it through some carefully crafted blinders.

reply to post by buster2010


Your point number one makes no sense either, since his election Obama has spent more in both total dollars and percentage of GDP than his predecessor. I don't call folks liars without a source so.
governmentspending.com

It's easily searchable by year and I went through every year of Obama and Bush. In no year since he has been President has Obama spent less than Bush in either dollar amount or percentage of GDP. Bush's government spend as a percentage of GDP ranged from around 18% GDP early in his term to 23% in the final year. Obama's entire Presidency government spending has been over 25% of GDP. Historically, no matter what taxing regime the US has had, it has only been able to capture around 20% of GDP in revenues. That in my opinion would be a really good place to balance the budget, perhaps even an Amendment that limits the government to that level of spending except in times of declared war. The simple answer that neither party would accept would be to figure out what we can afford at that 20% of GDP spend level and fund what we can afford.

I'm 37 and George W Bush has been the worst President in my lifetime to date. I personally view Obama as right on his heels in mediocrity if not malevolence. As Obama has three years left in office I know that unless there is a radical improvement in his leadership he will pass Bush in my estimation of poor leadership.

Trying to crash the economy?

LOL - The economy has already crashed, the only thing propping things up right now is the FED. Just start tapering and lets see how well the economy does.

jefwane
reply to post by buster2010

 

Your point number one makes no sense either, since his election Obama has spent more in both total dollars and percentage of GDP than his predecessor. I don't call folks liars without a source so.
governmentspending.com

It's easily searchable by year and I went through every year of Obama and Bush. In no year since he has been President has Obama spent less than Bush in either dollar amount or percentage of GDP. Bush's government spend as a percentage of GDP ranged from around 18% GDP early in his term to 23% in the final year. Obama's entire Presidency government spending has been over 25% of GDP. Historically, no matter what taxing regime the US has had, it has only been able to capture around 20% of GDP in revenues. That in my opinion would be a really good place to balance the budget, perhaps even an Amendment that limits the government to that level of spending except in times of declared war. The simple answer that neither party would accept would be to figure out what we can afford at that 20% of GDP spend level and fund what we can afford.

I'm 37 and George W Bush has been the worst President in my lifetime to date. I personally view Obama as right on his heels in mediocrity if not malevolence. As Obama has three years left in office I know that unless there is a radical improvement in his leadership he will pass Bush in my estimation of poor leadership.

Go learn how Obama got the name the rubber stamp president.

reply to post by xuenchen

How many times do I have to point out to you that 09 is still Bush not Obama all of Bush's programs were still going on until December. Then look at 2010 to present it's going down.

reply to post by buster2010


Give it up with the Bush excuse.

Obama has been president for how many years now? How many policies of Bush has Obama supported. Obama is just continuing the elites agenda.

Wish some of you would get that through your heads. The corporate puppet masters are loving this.

I cannot believe its in question.

Of course the TP IS throwing the country under a bus
because they don't like the president. That's what this
has ALWAYS been about.

If Obama was White Republican and named Tripp Bristol...
Maybe a Senator from Tennessee ? And good ol boy Tripp, was hand picked
by Big Oil and the NRA, we wouldn't be having this conversation .

Health Care would be called "Freedom Care" and it would be the greatest
legislation ever passed.

reply to post by sealing


Trolling, sarcasm...or just stupid?

MidnightTide
reply to post by sealing

 

Trolling, sarcasm...or just stupid?

That's me..just stupid I guess.
Should I go with Rush? Or Michael Savage?
I'm obviously am so misinformed.
Please help me oh wise ones.

reply to post by sealing


Your answer should be "support none of them"

They are all owned by corporate lobbyists. Just do a search on Democrat representatives.....take a look at how many receive funds from corporate interests. Take a look at how many used to be top executives at those firms. The same can be said of the Republican Party.

The system has been rigged, DON'T FALL FOR THE LIES.

MidnightTide
reply to post by buster2010

 

Give it up with the Bush excuse.

Obama has been president for how many years now? How many policies of Bush has Obama supported. Obama is just continuing the elites agenda.

Wish some of you would get that through your heads. The corporate puppet masters are loving this.

No excuse to it. The Republicans kept demanding that the Bush tax cuts and programs to be extended before they would vote on anything.

Maybe you and a lot of others could get it through your heads that when Obama started his programs the spending went down. Even the graph he posted showed that.

buster2010
reply to post by xuenchen

 

How many times do I have to point out to you that 09 is still Bush not Obama all of Bush's programs were still going on until December. Then look at 2010 to present it's going down.

Thank God for the Republican majority in the House !!

Just imagine what a full blown Democrat congress would have continued to do !!

I didn't read all the post, but isn't it wonderful that after years of democrats and republicans destroying our country they have a,

scapegoat