Washington Post Racist Rant Backfires

reply to post by burdman30ott6

We have answers, good answers...

I'm sorry, but those are talking points, not solutions.

You can yell cut taxes to the middle class until you're blue in the face, but if you don't have actual legislation, and a framework for achieving your goals, than all of that is worth nothing.

I'm not saying that the Tea Party don't have legitimate concerns, or ideas that can be a good thing for the country. I just don't see that translated into meaningful legislative action. All I see is obstructionist governance and a stick waiving contest between the Tea Party and old school GOP.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower

So when a division of one of the two political parties are confronted with the rest of their party and the Democrats doing the wrong thing, what are they to do?

According to you, they shouldn't obstruct.

Their option would be to either get out of the way, or support doing the wrong thing.

Our government is so out of control and very far removed from the common American citizen that they should be shut down.

A good answer is a consumption tax. Sure, it will stifle spending (and the economy). But it will also drive quality in innovation (instead of Chinese junk), which has its own positive benefits. And it will increase savings/investment.

reply to post by butcherguy

when a division of one of the two political parties are confronted with the rest of their party and the Democrats doing the wrong thing, what are they to do?

Come up with legislative solutions in place of the one's being presented by the opposition.

Like any normal political party would do. Instead of just yelling no.

~Tenth

tothetenthpower
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

We have answers, good answers...

I'm sorry, but those are talking points, not solutions.

You can yell cut taxes to the middle class until you're blue in the face, but if you don't have actual legislation, and a framework for achieving your goals, than all of that is worth nothing.

I'm not saying that the Tea Party don't have legitimate concerns, or ideas that can be a good thing for the country. I just don't see that translated into meaningful legislative action. All I see is obstructionist governance and a stick waiving contest between the Tea Party and old school GOP.

~Tenth

It is NOT just a talking point. It is absolutely a real solution. It is beyond ridiculous that people who believe that increasing taxes is a "real solution" are often the same who claim that reducing spending is just a talking point. Both accomplish the same thing on a short term federal level... they reduce the deficit and, ultimately the debt. The problem is increasing taxes also ultimately hits GDP a lot harder than cutting federal spending does, which means in the long terms taxes would have to continue to escalate to maintain funding levels.

It's a hell of a lot easier to cancel the cable and start buying store brand foods when you have a personal budgeting crisis than it is to go take a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th job. If you attempt to fix your budget crisis through increasing your income, you eventually reach a point where you're spending all your time working and all those fun toys you just have to shell out money for are left sitting at home unplayed with because you have no free time.

The same is true on the federal level.

Meaningfull Legislative Action: CUT OFF THE MYRIAD OF TEATS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SEEMS INFATUATED WITH ATTACHING MORE AND MORE PROGRAMS TO. Bring troops home, abandon assbrained "government will provide for you" nonsense, and stop being a goddamned nanny state. Eliminate progress crushing regulations so America's production sectors can get their asses back to work. End this World Police bullspit and let the rest of the world twist while we take care of our own issues for a change.

These are legislative actions. The fact is the obstructionism goes both ways. Everytime the TEA Party attempts to pass these solutions, the big ass baby in the White House throws a little temper tantrum and his handlers in the Senate rush to his rescue. That is obstructionist. Creating a system in which nearly half of America depends directly on federal handouts in some form for their personal finances, thus ensuring that their have a vast voter base unwilling to vote against the Meal Ticket is obstructionist. That's the real problem here... the minute the Democrats accept the legislative framework being presented by the TEA Party, their voter base will be decimated out from under them because it will result in an end to government subsidized life and elimination of their jacked up concept of "fairness".

tothetenthpower
reply to post by butcherguy

 

when a division of one of the two political parties are confronted with the rest of their party and the Democrats doing the wrong thing, what are they to do?

Come up with legislative solutions in place of the one's being presented by the opposition.

Like any normal political party would do. Instead of just yelling no.

~Tenth

What if you believe that the solution isn't to create more legislation, but rather to curtail that already in place?

To be fair, it does seem you are measuring their political effectiveness with a scale that ignores a key element of the Tea Party movement: that the law books stack too damn high.

tothetenthpower
Come up with legislative solutions in place of the one's being presented by the opposition.

Like any normal political party would do. Instead of just yelling no.

~Tenth

They did that. Just because Obama reads "that isn't a solution" off his teleprompter in an authoritarian voice doesn't mean it wasn't a real solution. Sometimes you have to actually dig into the proposals and educate yourself on them rather than taking whatever the Obamas, Rieds, and Pelosis are saying as the gospel.

tothetenthpower
reply to post by butcherguy

 

when a division of one of the two political parties are confronted with the rest of their party and the Democrats doing the wrong thing, what are they to do?

Come up with legislative solutions in place of the one's being presented by the opposition.

Like any normal political party would do. Instead of just yelling no.

~Tenth

I would suggest something like Rand Paul's bill to audit the Fed as an example of valid legislation. Harry Reid has admitted the Fed should be audited but refused to bring the last bill to a vote. Now there is another opportunity and we'll get to see if the old guard GOP and the democrats in the senate stop this bill as well.

Not quite sure how this relates to the WaPo fiasco though except it's definitely partisan politics.

tothetenthpower
reply to post by butcherguy

 

when a division of one of the two political parties are confronted with the rest of their party and the Democrats doing the wrong thing, what are they to do?

Come up with legislative solutions in place of the one's being presented by the opposition.

Like any normal political party would do. Instead of just yelling no.

~Tenth

I like a person that says no to bad things.....

Instead of supporting a crew of idiots that continue to do the same bad things.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

they did that. Just because Obama reads "that isn't a solution" off his teleprompter in an authoritarian voice doesn't mean it wasn't a real solution. Sometimes you have to actually dig into the proposals and educate yourself on them rather than taking whatever the Obamas, Rieds, and Pelosis are saying as the gospel.

Well now you're just throwing partisan rocks around.

I'm not a democrat, you know where I stand politically, I support neither party.

Show me the legislative agenda of the tea party. Not their 'talking points', but show me the written bills introduced into congress and then debated properly and voted upon.

I haven't seen any that isn't just reversing some existing legislation to counter it.

~Tenth

reply to post by butcherguy

I like a person that says no to bad things.....

So do I, but if all you're going to do is say no, then you aren't useful to me. I can get a group of kinder garden kids to do that job for cookies and milk as payment instead of my tax dollars.

No, I would prefer opposition solutions, in the form of actual legislation as opposed to talking points.

~Tenth

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

o be fair, it does seem you are measuring their political effectiveness with a scale that ignores a key element of the Tea Party movement: that the law books stack too damn high.

Then show me the legislation that the tea party wants abolished specifically, along with the verified information on how this will effect the economy and Americans as a whole.

Show me some actual evidence that you've done some WORK to come to these conclusions. There needs to be something on paper, something viable, a plan of some kind.

Road maps are not just optional in politics, they are a necessity if you plan on having people like me take you seriously.

~Tenth

tothetenthpower
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

o be fair, it does seem you are measuring their political effectiveness with a scale that ignores a key element of the Tea Party movement: that the law books stack too damn high.

Then show me the legislation that the tea party wants abolished specifically, along with the verified information on how this will effect the economy and Americans as a whole.

Show me some actual evidence that you've done some WORK to come to these conclusions. There needs to be something on paper, something viable, a plan of some kind.

Road maps are not just optional in politics, they are a necessity if you plan on having people like me take you seriously.

~Tenth

Oh, don't get me wrong. I am neither a tea party follower (i don't follow groups, choosing to lead my own parade) nor a politician. I can write company rules and guidelines, maybe make you a marketing plan. Outside that, i leave law writing to folks with the energy to shout for hours on end in the halls of Congress.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I didn't mean you specifically lol

~tenth

tothetenthpower
Not their 'talking points', but show me the written bills introduced into congress and then debated properly and voted upon.

Debated properly and voted on is going to be nigh unto impossible because Harry Reid has openly refused to allow any conservative sponsored bills to even be discussed in the Senate, let alone voted on. (Quirky little obstructionist right there...)
TEA sponsored legislation, however.. OK
-Fairness for American Families Act
-Cut, Cap, And Balance Act
-Numerous spending cut proposals with clearly stated programs and "targets" to account for the cuts
-Patient's Choice Act
-Taxpayer Protection Act

Like I said, they've proposed and sponsored quite a few pieces of legilsative action... but their acts step on the toes of the party in charge and, as a result, the media's boogeymen "obstructionists" have to deal with the real obstructionists blocking their efforts to enact change.

tothetenthpower
Then show me the legislation that the tea party wants abolished specifically, along with the verified information on how this will effect the economy and Americans as a whole.

Show me some actual evidence that you've done some WORK to come to these conclusions. There needs to be something on paper, something viable, a plan of some kind.

History has done all the work needed to demonstrate that the current course the nation is on, fiscally speaking, is the path to collapse. History has also shown us that you can neither spend nor tax your way to solvency... it can only be accomplished through not spending more than you take in.

Hell, Economics 101 teaches that on the first day...
Income - spending = surplus/deficit.
deficit^infinity = a debt which can never be paid.

burdman30ott6

(snip)

Eliminate progress crushing regulations so America's production sectors can get their asses back to work. End this World Police bullspit and let the rest of the world twist while we take care of our own issues for a change.

(snip)

You have some interesting points, but this isn't one of them. Progress crushing regulations?

You mean protecting our environment from corporations whose only end result is making as much profit as possible w/o worrying about the risk? If that is what you mean, take a trip to any manufacturing metropolis in Asia to see what a lack of "crushing regulations" allows. Feel free to check out the Niger delta too.

As for progress the last time I checked all corporations and their progress is built around milking existing technology for as long as possible. They don't have scientists, but technologists.

That's why in the 21st century we still run the world on 19th century (and earlier) technology.

Or did I read that part of your post wrong?

Derek

Viesczy
Or did I read that part of your post wrong?

Kind of, you did. The threshold is subjective, obviously, but some degree of common sense should be applied to government permits and environmental regulations. That common sense is currently absent.

I work in the infrastructure industry on the conceptualization, permitting, design, and construction engineering side of things. Believe me when I tell you the level of red tape has reached the point where most of us actually question whether the ultimate goal is simply to discourage anyone from constructing anything.

Take a creek for example. You have no fewer than 5 agencies/programs to satisfy just to place a single shovelfull of material within the wetland boundary of said creek. Each agency's permit essentially contains the same type of information, but each one requires it to be disseminated in a different format or broken down along different requirements... this makes you basically have to do 5 times the work and wait 5 times as long before any construction work happens.
-Coast Guard permit for navigable waters (definition of which has been expanded to incorporate virtually any water that flows, even in a trickle, downhill.)
-NEPA permit for environmental polutant discharge (soil, rocks, precast concrete pilings... all considered polutants by the EPA and all must be categorized and tabulated meticulously)
-USCOE permit for wetland mitigation: Corps of Engineers is the first line of defense for wetland impacts. They also no longer consider cost as a guideline for alternatives which don't impact a wetland... Pretty much if you have to spend an extra $50 Million to avoid that shovelfull of earth into a wetland of significance, then don't bother telling them the cost because they don't give a flip. You're basically stuck trying to find an engineering/safety/or greater negative environmental impact against the more expensive alternative or they will force the project to the spendier solution.
-FEMA: Your shovelfull of dirt will raise the water in the creek, just pray to God it doesn't raise the Ordinary High High Water (OHHW) elevation by more than 1/16th of an inch or you will have to prepare a LOMAR (Letter of Map Revision) and recieve a permit before rewriting the LOMAR, making it a CLOMAR (Certified Letter of Map Revision).
-The EPA will also require an approved Storm Water Polution Prevention Plan along with an approved Memorandum of Understanding allowing you to proceed with the project.
-In addition you have a years long iterative process with multiple agencies called the Environmental Impact Statement reports. These are ever changing because, everytime an agency changes their criteria, there is no grandfathering in process unless your project is already nearing completion of construction. That's right... you can be 99.9% finished with your design phase and be planning to submit wet sealed drawings Friday and if a new policy takes effect on Thursday, you're gonna have to accomodate it.

These are just a handfull of the crappy policies affecting my small window of life. When you get into industrial applications the mounds of paperwork and miles of red tape get even more daunting.

I'm not opposed to common sense stewardship in any way. I am, however, pissed off and tired of seeing nonsense impact progress. Anthropomorphic climate change, for example... you don't cost Americans billions (trillions?) of dollars on scientific speculations. Of course it isn't the politicians' money that's being played with, it's the tax payers and workers' money... so what does Washington care? Throw another coal fire plant on the scrap heap and let the country's electricity bills double or triple, the White House and Capital Hill will always have their lights paid for by tax dollars, so who gives a flip what the pissants in the masses have to do to afford the real bonehead regulation costs?