Member since May 31, 2011
This user has no shared collections.
View More Collections
Why don't you go browse some
and pick a few to favorite?
commented on Steve Benson
1 day ago
Please cite your sources. You use the absolutes when I have yet to see concrete examples of any that you spout..“…wanting government to enforce their religious, moral,…” I’ve attended meetings where the leader said welcome, then explained their strictly about fiscal responsibility and returning the U.S. to the principles of the Constitution. Any social ideology needed to be left at the door.
“… who literally want the poor to starve to death…” First, learn what the word literally means. Unless you meant literally in which case I think you’d find that person would be out of a job next election. Most Tea Partiers I know see a need for public safety nets. We just disagree with how they’re run, ever expanding, and hugely bureaucratic and expensive. Did you know they advertise food stamps now with the premise “If you’re not on food stamps, you’re a fool.” Is this right?
“it’s my opinion that people embrace the TP politics out of mixed combinations of ignorance, bigotry, hatred, and anger.” And you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but as one who is none of those yet identify with the Tea Party, and who know many who identify with the tea party and are none of those, I ask for your personal experiences with Tea Partiers that support this. Perhaps it’s local, but I’ve attended meetings and rallies in Florida and Wisconsin, both hot beds of political activity, and I experienced none of those things. I would walk away if I did.
commented on Paul Szep
12 days ago
“No better job available…”. How about 3 million. Employers are desperate for hard-working skilled laborers. My brother’s boss says he’s willing to train and hire anyone who’s willing to show up consistently. http://www.mikeroweworks.com/2013/07/u-s-unemployment-three-million-jobs-are-waiting-to-be-filled/
commented on Scott Stantis
19 days ago
commented on Joe Heller
27 days ago
I’m a big enough man to admit I was wrong about the first sentence. I was inferring facts not in evidence based on something I read. That said, I still challenge you to look for hold-up in time it takes to confirm a nominee under this regime versus the last. Also, it still doesn’t change my main point that the Democrats change the rules, and then complain about it when Republicans use them. it’s horrifying that what was supposed to be a check-and-balance measure against the ruling party has been reduced to essentially nothing as the majority can just vote it away. Horrifying that it was abused and that it was done away with..And 2nd, when the time comes that the Republicans are the majority in the Senate and vote to cloture all Democrat filibusters, how quickly will the Dems will cry foul?
The filibuster system was designed to give the minority party a voice and allow them to prevent the worst of legislation. It was supposed to be used in times of desperation and would stop any other legislation from being passed until the issue was resolved. Filibuster changes in recent decades have made them far less painless and easier to both implement without political repercussions and to break. Last decade the Dems have used the filibuster far more and blocked many more appointments than the Repubs did under Obama. Nominees have passed much quicker under Obama then under Bush when the Dems were the minority. So, in conclusion, the Republicans played by the same rules – the rules the Democrats enacted – just less often. And in the future, minority parties will have even less recourse to “bad” legislation. This will, of course, mean when it’s the Republicans turn, the Democrats will no recourse but to accept it. Right?
As the dollar becomes inflated, things cost more, that includes buying stocks. There are times when the DOW going up and reaching record highs is a good thing. In recent years, it’s an indication that the dollar in the international markets is worth less as foreign investors refuse to sell unless they can get what they paid for it.
commented on Scott Stantis
about 1 month ago
Well put. But I think (hope) is this will go beyond your well-deserved cynicism. It took 5 years but the brilliance that is the promise of hope & change and a new New Deal is finally starting to wear off. His fellow Dems are turning on him, the people who voted for him are turning on him, and because ACA was passed almost exactly on party lines, the Dems are getting shellacked the media is turning on both.
This isn’t vicar for the man, it’s the ideals he represents. Obama has proven that given enough time and money, the government will just squander more time and money. More and more Americans are finding stock in the Tea Party: as many [as] 42% say their views come closest to those of the average Tea Party member instead – Rasmussen, Oct 2013.
If conservatives don’t squander it, work slowly and methodically, stay on message and don’t try to hit people over the head with extreme social views, I think there’s a real chance for 2014 to open the doors for true smaller government conservatism.
Now my cynicism comes into play: we need real conservatives, not RINOs, if we’re going to truly reduce government spending. Boehner is just as bad is Reed. Those that are beholden to large lobbyists or corporations or just interested in the next election need to leave. At least liberals, for the most part, practice what they preach. I agree with the liberal pundits like Chris Matthews who say that if Republicans own the house and the white house, like they did 10 years ago, and don’t do anything to fix healthcare or the our social safety nets, then they’re worse than Obama. Doing nothing at all is worse than at least trying something.
commented on Rob Rogers
about 1 month ago
That’s absolutely right Mike. It’s either too many taxes or no taxes. There’s nothing in between that equates to reasonable taxation that’s both fair and fairly applied. Insisting that government programs that have fulfilled their mandates are scrutinized is unreasonable. Insisting that our elected officials follow the oaths they’ve taken, which include upholding the constitution, is truly radical thinking.
commented on Ted Rall
about 1 month ago
While it’s fun to point out “American elitism” because they call themselves Americans it’s not that at all. It’s not egotism that makes Americans the accepted name for those from the United States of America. It’s common standard developed by peoples of all countries. Simply put, Americans is easier to say than United Statesians.
commented on Tom Toles
2 months ago
When your party is represented by Boehner, I welcome the implosion. I’m tired of the Republicans being part of the problem but still shouting “We’re better than they are because we’re not quite as bad.” The Republican needs a lot of work and this could very well be the wake-up they need to start focusing on ideology, leadership and marketing.
Copyright © 2013. Universal Uclick, All rights reserved.