Obama/Clinton mock Tea Party movement
- Thread starter aristotle
- Start date
I don't know, I was hoping that you did. He was leading the rally protesting the Detroit Bomber that got turned over to the FBI. The vocal guy on Detroit TV. My nephew was going to get me the info but as yet I have not heard anything. Dang gum college kids!!
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Re: !
Arena Digest: Why is the GOP establishment scared of Ron and Rand Paul?
Grover Norquist, president, Americans for Tax Reform:
"We have been here before.
Around 1980, Lincoln Republicans (Northern establishment Protestants) worried about the influx of religious conservatives: conservative Roman Catholics and Orthodox Jews from northern cities and the Southern Baptists and other evangelicals from the South and rural areas.
In 1989, there was a new worry when Pat Robertson’s campaign activists joined the party structures after his 1988 primary campaign.
In 2008, the Ron Paul activists showed up and stayed in Republican Party politics. More worries.
And now the tea party activists who were not active two years ago but became active in reaction to the Obama/Reid/Pelosi explosion of federal spending are swelling the ranks of the conservative movement and promising/threatening to vote Republican.
I want more such problems in the future."
Ya gotta love Grover ..... but he is only partially right on the Tea Party movement ....
The other half of the equation (that he apparently doesn't get, or more likely, isn't stating directly, for political reasons) is that the original Tea Party movement isn't only in response to Obama/Pelosi/Reid - it actually predated that, and was in response to Bush/Cheney and their doctrine of "war without end" and the consequent prospect of the squandering of our wealth for generations to come as a result of foreign adventurism, as well as the Financial Bailout.
As to the "swelling the ranks of the conservative movement and promising/threatening to vote Republican" ..... well that depends .... largely on how you define conservative (neo-con Republican ain't gonna fly with that particular public ....) ....... and who the particular Republicans are (the old dinosaurs and party establishment ain't gonna get it either ... ) ... so it's a bit of a slightly moist dream on Grover's part .....
David Boaz, executive vice president, Cato Institute
seems to "get it" a little better:
"Three weeks ago, at a Cato Institute conference, Grover Norquist asked three Republican congressmen how many of their colleagues now think the Iraq war was a mistake. The answer: “almost all of us.” That’s an issue the GOP establishment doesn’t want an open debate on.
And that’s why, even though Rand Paul would be the strongest voice in the Senate for spending restraint and constitutional government, Big Government conservatives in Washington are trying to keep him out of the Senate: Because they desperately fear that a conservative anti-interventionist leader on foreign policy just might reveal that a lot of Republicans and conservatives across the country don’t buy the world-policeman foreign policy the Bush-Cheney administration imposed on the GOP.
.... Really ? ....... no kiddin' ?
The remainder of the survey can be found at:
Why is the GOP establishment scared of Ron and Rand Paul?
Indeed ..... maybe it's actually happening:
Arena Digest: Why is the GOP establishment scared of Ron and Rand Paul?
Grover Norquist, president, Americans for Tax Reform:
"We have been here before.
Around 1980, Lincoln Republicans (Northern establishment Protestants) worried about the influx of religious conservatives: conservative Roman Catholics and Orthodox Jews from northern cities and the Southern Baptists and other evangelicals from the South and rural areas.
In 1989, there was a new worry when Pat Robertson’s campaign activists joined the party structures after his 1988 primary campaign.
In 2008, the Ron Paul activists showed up and stayed in Republican Party politics. More worries.
And now the tea party activists who were not active two years ago but became active in reaction to the Obama/Reid/Pelosi explosion of federal spending are swelling the ranks of the conservative movement and promising/threatening to vote Republican.
I want more such problems in the future."
Ya gotta love Grover
..... but he is only partially right on the Tea Party movement .... The other half of the equation (that he apparently doesn't get, or more likely, isn't stating directly, for political reasons) is that the original Tea Party movement isn't only in response to Obama/Pelosi/Reid - it actually predated that, and was in response to Bush/Cheney and their doctrine of "war without end" and the consequent prospect of the squandering of our wealth for generations to come as a result of foreign adventurism, as well as the Financial Bailout.
As to the "swelling the ranks of the conservative movement and promising/threatening to vote Republican" ..... well that depends .... largely on how you define conservative (neo-con Republican ain't gonna fly with that particular public ....
) ....... and who the particular Republicans are (the old dinosaurs and party establishment ain't gonna get it either ... ) ... so it's a bit of a slightly moist dream on Grover's part .....David Boaz, executive vice president, Cato Institute
seems to "get it" a little better:
"Three weeks ago, at a Cato Institute conference, Grover Norquist asked three Republican congressmen how many of their colleagues now think the Iraq war was a mistake. The answer: “almost all of us.” That’s an issue the GOP establishment doesn’t want an open debate on.
And that’s why, even though Rand Paul would be the strongest voice in the Senate for spending restraint and constitutional government, Big Government conservatives in Washington are trying to keep him out of the Senate: Because they desperately fear that a conservative anti-interventionist leader on foreign policy just might reveal that a lot of Republicans and conservatives across the country don’t buy the world-policeman foreign policy the Bush-Cheney administration imposed on the GOP.
.... Really ? ....... no kiddin' ?
The remainder of the survey can be found at:
Why is the GOP establishment scared of Ron and Rand Paul?
Last edited:
jaminjim
Veteran Expediter
Everybody that reads these political posts know that some people think their Dumbocrates and Republicons or what ever your cute name of the day is, is original and tells it like it is. But could we quit with the stupid names? If it was something original that would be one thing, but it gets tiring. Reminds me of the "is too/is not" BS from little kids on the playground. If you feel that it's that important to call them Obuma, pants load in chief, and all the other childish names put them in your lengthy signature lines (that I have turned off because of the nonsense spouted in them) One signature line has over twenty-five lines and a misspelling to boot. (Not that I'm a spelling master, but everyone of your posts show a misspelled word.)
Please give the stupid nick names a rest!
Please give the stupid nick names a rest!
They are no longer the parties for the names that they held at one time. The are perverted shells of what they once were.
If they were people of honor, which they are not, they would be honest about the party names and they would change them to reflect what they believe in. Example. The democrats change their name to the Socialist Party of North America. That would be a far more accurate and much closer to their beliefs and goals.
The republicans would have to change to something like the Progressive Conservative Party.
They should also drop the oath that they take when they enter office. Many of them that place their hand on that bible don't even believe in that bible.
From what I can see, a very large majority of them have no idea what so ever of protecting or defending the Constitution of the United States and don't believe the ideals and dreams that it represents.
I use Dumb-O-Crats becasue I think that their ideas are dumb and bad, not only for the United State but for Mankind in general. I use ReBumLiCans because I think that they are nothing more than a bunch of bums.
I have zero respect for them. They, without a doubt, have zero respect for the People of the United States or their beliefs and freedoms. Those that populate those two criminal organizations that we call political parties in this country have earned the named calling.
If they were people of honor, which they are not, they would be honest about the party names and they would change them to reflect what they believe in. Example. The democrats change their name to the Socialist Party of North America. That would be a far more accurate and much closer to their beliefs and goals.
The republicans would have to change to something like the Progressive Conservative Party.
They should also drop the oath that they take when they enter office. Many of them that place their hand on that bible don't even believe in that bible.
From what I can see, a very large majority of them have no idea what so ever of protecting or defending the Constitution of the United States and don't believe the ideals and dreams that it represents.
I use Dumb-O-Crats becasue I think that their ideas are dumb and bad, not only for the United State but for Mankind in general. I use ReBumLiCans because I think that they are nothing more than a bunch of bums.
I have zero respect for them. They, without a doubt, have zero respect for the People of the United States or their beliefs and freedoms. Those that populate those two criminal organizations that we call political parties in this country have earned the named calling.
If a person is willing to compromise their PRINCIPLES for power then they either have no idea what a PRINCIPLE is, or, have no honor. A person of PRINCIPLE, does not compromise them for power or gain. Such a person would leave a situation that would not allow them to work within the principles. Principles, core values etc, are more important than personal gain or power. A person of principle would rather die than compromise their principles. A principle, core value etc is what a person base their life on. NOTHING is more important.
I do not see that out there.