Some 700 Nationwide TEA PARTY PROTESTS happening across America today.... [my pics included]

[burns1923]

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Yes, but he is raising taxes. He raised taxes on the wealthy. This is where the two sides get separated. The money that will be taken from the top 5% of the people in our country will help out the rest of us.

If the money for health care does come from taxes, again, it will benefit everybody. So if everybody has to pay a little more so they can get affordable insurance so they can see a doctor every once in a while, so be it. People would be jumping at this if they could understand the hardships of those who don't have insurance.

But the "wealthy", the "5%", are made up also of thousands of small businessmen and women who file as individuals because they are notcorporations. The more they are taxed, the less working capital they have, the less they can pay workers or keep workers (forget hiring altogether). Theycan't expand or even maintain their business because they won't have the operating capital to do so. Workers get laid off, businesses close, new jobsaren't created because new businesses never get off the ground. The cycle continues for them. 2 million jobs have been lost in the first 3 months of thisyear alone. And this is before Obama's plans have really begun. Job loss can't be stopped yet Obama wants to create new jobs while he's spendingall of this money and wants to spend more over his term?

It isn't anyone else's job to help individuals out. I work for my money and it's tough enough maintaining basic expenditures. I'm entirelyagainst someone else gaining from my labor.

You mentioned healthcare... aside from the grotesque government control it would espouse and the astonomical cost to Americans, why should we be paying forsomeone else's medical bills? Again, it's not my responsibility to contribute to someone else's bills!

Remember Tom Daschle, Obama's Health and Human Services nominee? Well, thank God that Daschle had to drop out and didn't get the job.

Daschle had a proposal on the table that would've created a Health Services Oversight Board that would be in charge of deciding which medical benefitswould be honored, which wouldn't, and what the appropriate medical treatments could be for any given person. For example, if a person needs a bone marrowtransplant but the Board says that the transplant is neither covered nor approved under their program, the patient dies.

Ask the UK how that's working out. People having to wait years for operations or transplants when they have months to live.

Nationalized healthcare is a moral and economic disaster.

And I saw that CNN video before. It doesn't say Bush was charged with or admitted to anything. Again, if there were any weight to this story, itwould've been huge.

 

[swyftdahoe]

Couldn't you guys just re-invade Iraq? Or invade Saudi Arabia or something? Come on.. go hijack some oil.. Tag team with the Somali pirates..
What silliness.. Tea party.. lmao.. You lost conservatives, get over it.. Or at least give the man some time.. Oh, unless you have better solutions to theglobal economic crisis..

 

[callhimar]

Originally Posted by Burns1923

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Yes, but he is raising taxes. He raised taxes on the wealthy. This is where the two sides get separated. The money that will be taken from the top 5% of the people in our country will help out the rest of us.

If the money for health care does come from taxes, again, it will benefit everybody. So if everybody has to pay a little more so they can get affordable insurance so they can see a doctor every once in a while, so be it. People would be jumping at this if they could understand the hardships of those who don't have insurance.

But the "wealthy", the "5%", are made up also of thousands of small businessmen and women who file as individuals because they are not corporations. The more they are taxed, the less working capital they have, the less they can pay workers or keep workers (forget hiring altogether). They can't expand or even maintain their business because they won't have the operating capital to do so. Workers get laid off, businesses close, new jobs aren't created because new businesses never get off the ground. The cycle continues for them. 2 million jobs have been lost in the first 3 months of this year alone. And this is before Obama's plans have really begun. Job loss can't be stopped yet Obama wants to create new jobs while he's spending all of this money and wants to spend more over his term?

I agree with your first point. I just don't think it will lead to the dire straights that you believe it will. It will hurt a few, but notall, and surely not enough to make things worse.

It isn't anyone else's job to help individuals out. I work for my money and it's tough enough maintaining basic expenditures. I'm entirely against someone else gaining from my labor.

You mentioned healthcare... aside from the grotesque government control it would espouse and the astonomical cost to Americans, why should we be paying for someone else's medical bills? Again, it's not my responsibility to contribute to someone else's bills!
I can't understand why you wouldn't want to help a fellow human being that is in need. While handling your own expenditures might betough, there are many people out there who cannot live as well as you may or may not be. Maybe if some of us gave up the extra car that we didn't reallyneed, cut a few inches off the TV we want and thought about our fellow man who is dying because he has no insurance, we would be in a better state morally. Itshould be your responsibility as a human being to help out someone when they cannot help themselves out. If you find THAT immoral, than I don't know whatto say.

And I saw that CNN video before. It doesn't say Bush was charged with or admitted to anything. Again, if there were any weight to this story, it would've been huge.
I never said he was charged with anything, nor did I say he admitted to anything, but he DID pardon himself. If that is not an admission of someguilt than I don't know what is.

 

[49ers650]

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Originally Posted by Burns1923

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Yes, but he is raising taxes. He raised taxes on the wealthy. This is where the two sides get separated. The money that will be taken from the top 5% of the people in our country will help out the rest of us.

If the money for health care does come from taxes, again, it will benefit everybody. So if everybody has to pay a little more so they can get affordable insurance so they can see a doctor every once in a while, so be it. People would be jumping at this if they could understand the hardships of those who don't have insurance.

But the "wealthy", the "5%", are made up also of thousands of small businessmen and women who file as individuals because they are not corporations. The more they are taxed, the less working capital they have, the less they can pay workers or keep workers (forget hiring altogether). They can't expand or even maintain their business because they won't have the operating capital to do so. Workers get laid off, businesses close, new jobs aren't created because new businesses never get off the ground. The cycle continues for them. 2 million jobs have been lost in the first 3 months of this year alone. And this is before Obama's plans have really begun. Job loss can't be stopped yet Obama wants to create new jobs while he's spending all of this money and wants to spend more over his term?

I agree with your first point. I just don't think it will lead to the dire straights that you believe it will. It will hurt a few, but not all, and surely not enough to make things worse.

It isn't anyone else's job to help individuals out. I work for my money and it's tough enough maintaining basic expenditures. I'm entirely against someone else gaining from my labor.

You mentioned healthcare... aside from the grotesque government control it would espouse and the astonomical cost to Americans, why should we be paying for someone else's medical bills? Again, it's not my responsibility to contribute to someone else's bills!

I can't understand why you wouldn't want to help a fellow human being that is in need. While handling your own expenditures might be tough, there are many people out there who cannot live as well as you may or may not be. Maybe if some of us gave up the extra car that we didn't really need, cut a few inches off the TV we want and thought about our fellow man who is dying because he has no insurance, we would be in a better state morally. It should be your responsibility as a human being to help out someone when they cannot help themselves out. If you find THAT immoral, than I don't know what to say.

And I saw that CNN video before. It doesn't say Bush was charged with or admitted to anything. Again, if there were any weight to this story, it would've been huge.
I never said he was charged with anything, nor did I say he admitted to anything, but he DID pardon himself. If that is not an admission of some guilt than I don't know what is.



I'm not even sure on the first point. I mean business owners will cut costs in all areas regardless of low taxes. The "John I can'tafford to keep you on the payroll is more of the lower percentile of businesses. You're thinking too highly of business owners.

 

[isiah heaven]

SMH @ anyone picking a party, some of you claim you are in a so called "Political Party" yet you don't know LAW or have a copy of the your ownconstitution. Do some research before you go crying about why this country is the way it is and maybe answers would be more clear to some of you.

 

[burns1923]

I can't understand why you wouldn't want to help a fellow human being that is in need. While handling your own expenditures might be tough, there are many people out there who cannot live as well as you may or may not be. Maybe if some of us gave up the extra car that we didn't really need, cut a few inches off the TV we want and thought about our fellow man who is dying because he has no insurance, we would be in a better state morally. It should be your responsibility as a human being to help out someone when they cannot help themselves out. If you find THAT immoral, than I don't know what to say.

I'll give the shirt off of my back to help anyone in need. Any possession or resource I have, I'll give. The difference here is thatObama wants to MAKE people spend pay for programs that other people will directly benefit from. Americans are the most generous people in the world. We savedEurope from itself via the Marshall Plan. We've sacrificed blood and treasure the world over for others. We don't need our president to contract usinto involuntarily paying for others. It is neither his right or position to do so, and it should not be a legal obligation to give to others.

Sure, there is need out there and plenty of people who meet those needs without any recognition. But the reality is that not every person's needs can bemet by another human being, nor should they. If they could, people could sit back and live off of others. Obviously, that's wrong.
When the colonies began, goods produced had to be shared with everyone regardless. People began to realize that certain citizens were sitting back doingnothing while others worked hard. That stopped very quickly, forcing people to get up, produce something, and realize their own potential. That's whatthis country was founded upon; that's how businesses and corporations were begun, how dreams were made reality.

Benevolence is a choice, not a law. Government has no business placing that yoke upon Americans. You can see how well the welfare system has worked. Ithasn't.

I never said he was charged with anything, nor did I say he admitted to anything, but he DID pardon himself. If that is not an admission of some guilt than I don't know what is.

He didn't pardon himself. According to that video, a caveat was supposedly included that would prevent him and his administration frombeing charged should anyone ever attempt to do so. I don't know Bush's exact reasoning for this; I can only speculate that he believed he operated ina manner he felt would best protect and benefit the American people, and that he didn't want any possible alteration of the measures he implemented overhis presidency that have contributed to preventing further terrorism against us.

 

[tbone95860]

 

[callhimar]

Honestly, here's where we're going to just have to agree to disagree because I firmly believe that the government should be in control of health carejust as they are in control of so many other industries that are necessities. Health care is not a luxury, it is a necessity.

He didn't pardon himself. According to that video, a caveat was supposedly included that would prevent him and his administration from being charged should anyone ever attempt to do so.
You say tomato, I say tomAto.

With the back end of that comment, we could get into a whole other discussion about Guantanamo and how it in fact created more terrorists, but then we'll just be on more of a tangent than we already are.

TBone, the more videos like that you post, the more you prove how idiotic the people out there really are, so by all means keep going.

 

[burns1923]

Honestly, here's where we're going to just have to agree to disagree because I firmly believe that the government should be in control of health care just as they are in control of so many other industries that are necessities. Health care is not a luxury, it is a necessity.

We can agree to disagree. That's fine.

Government wasn't created to take care of or control people and industries. Government is to govern, as in provide societal structure, not administer. Health care, as in having doctors and hospitals and medicines available, is a necessity. Health insurance, which Obama wants to provide for everyone at eachother's expense, is not a necessity. It's my life, my bills, and it's not John and Jane Doe's responsibility to contribute to my bills or topay for them. They have their own and they pay their own way with money earned by their own God-given abilities and skills.

 

[tbone95860]

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

TBone, the more videos like that you post, the more you prove how idiotic the people out there really are, so by all means keep going.

Yeah right.

More like the fraud that is CNN.... this reporter was comical & trying to get at the people she was interviewing

Sheppard Smith on Fox News commented on this after it happened correctly..... "Over there on CNN, the news organization that no one watches any more"

No wonder no one watches any more..... they got people like this out in the field!!

 

[callhimar]

Right, but you and I both know that if you cannot afford to pay for insurance, then you damn sure aren't going to be able to pay for treatment if you getinjured or sick, that's just common sense. Also, when you need insurance to be admitted to most hospitals, it becomes a problem because the people are notreceiving the care that they need.

 

[deuce king]

Fox News covered these protests because they're the only ones even remotely covering hard news anymore.

LOL.

Sheppard Smith on Fox News commented on this after it happened correctly..... "Over there on CNN, the news organization that no one watches any more"

No wonder no one watches any more..... they got people like this out in the field!!


Question TBONE, if so many people watch Fox News and their rating beat out other news organizations then why did the GOP lose the2008 Presidential election??

 

[mangudai954]

Originally Posted by Burns1923

Bush isn't a war criminal.

He didn't pardon himself or his administration because there were no formal charges ever brought.

If this was a real story, it would've been ALL OVER cable, network, and print media with people foaming at the mouth.

 

[fede dpt]

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Yes, but he is raising taxes. He raised taxes on the wealthy. This is where the two sides get separated. The money that will be taken from the top 5% of the people in our country will help out the rest of us.

If the money for health care does come from taxes, again, it will benefit everybody. So if everybody has to pay a little more so they can get affordable insurance so they can see a doctor every once in a while, so be it. People would be jumping at this if they could understand the hardships of those who don't have insurance.

Everything here is blatantly wrong.

The National Socialists Party in Nazi Germany believed the same thing you just posted.


The Obama administration has turned this into class warfare. Just because someone makes more than some one else they have to "help out"? Are youserious? What happened to INDIVIDUALITY? Taxes are wrong, period.


Its easy to fix the health care system in this country. Create Medical Savings accounts, make Health Care tax-deductible again. Deregulate the industry, everystate mandates coverage on specific diseases, regulating the industry raises costs and decreases choices. Also, get rid of the terrible FDA, the FDA withinitself raises the cost of care in this country.


You know who is going to get the biggest tax INCREASE? The middle class! Just wait until Cap and Trade is force fed down this countries throat.

Question TBONE, if so many people watch Fox News and their rating beat out other news organizations then why did the GOP lose the 2008 Presidential election??


Um, not everyone that watches Fox is a Conservative? Are you that dense, bro?


[table][tr][td]5p:[/td] [td]6p:[/td] [td]7p:[/td] [td]8p:[/td] [td]9p:[/td] [td]10p:[/td] [td]11p:[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]FNC[/td] [td]Beck:[/td] [td]Baier:[/td] [td]Shep:[/td] [td]O'Reilly:[/td] [td]Hannity:[/td] [td]Greta:[/td] [td]O'Reilly:[/td] [/tr][tr][td] [/td] [td]704[/td] [td]552[/td] [td]484[/td] [td]826[/td] [td]701[/td] [td]653[/td] [td]512[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]CNN[/td] [td]Blitzer:[/td] [td]Blitzer:[/td] [td]Dobbs:[/td] [td]Brown:[/td] [td]King:[/td] [td]Cooper:[/td] [td]Cooper:[/td] [/tr][tr][td] [/td] [td]254[/td] [td]224[/td] [td]209[/td] [td]147[/td] [td]322[/td] [td]332[/td] [td]274[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]MSNBC[/td] [td]Matthews:[/td] [td]EdShow:[/td] [td]Matthews:[/td] [td]Olbermann:[/td] [td]Maddow:[/td] [td]Olbermann:[/td] [td]Maddow:[/td] [/tr][tr][td] [/td] [td]170[/td] [td]149[/td] [td]248[/td] [td]450[/td] [td]335[/td] [td]269[/td] [td]123[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]HLN[/td] [td]Prime:[/td] [td]Prime:[/td] [td]VMitchell:[/td] [td]Grace:[/td] [td]Dobbs:[/td] [td]Grace:[/td] [td]Showbiz:[/td] [/tr][tr][td] [/td] [td]156[/td] [td]137[/td] [td]226[/td] [td]410[/td] [td]195[/td] [td]331[/td] [td]278[/td] [/tr][/table]

Just look at these.

These were from 4/14/09.

This is pathetic. But hey, that's what happens when you CEO sends money to a terrorist state like Iran.



The fact that the Department of Homeland Security went out of its way to write a report on "Right-Wing Extremism" .

The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in "rightwing extremist activity," saying the economic recession, the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias.

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines "rightwing extremism in the United States" as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.


Oh like that thing in the US Constitution about State's Rights?!

The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues.

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.


COULD lead?! What evidence is there?



My tax money paying Janet Napolotano to write garbage like this for National Intelligence?

 

[jinkazama]

Been lurkin' around this thread for a minute and actually got an opportunity to talk to some tea party cats on yesterday. I'll pose to this forum thesame question I posed to them.

For the most part you had it your way for 8 years, yes I understand that you didn't agree with GWB's spending habits especially toward the end, but youhad more of what you wanted with him than with Barack. Give me your solution for how to fix the mess we are in now that does not include the same supply sideeconomic principles that have been in effect in the past?

 

[fede dpt]

Originally Posted by JinKazama

Been lurkin' around this thread for a minute and actually got an opportunity to talk to some tea party cats on yesterday. I'll pose to this forum the same question I posed to them.

For the most part you had it your way for 8 years, yes I understand that you didn't agree with GWB's spending habits especially toward the end, but you had more of what you wanted with him than with Barack. Give me your solution for how to fix the mess we are in now that does not include the same supply side economic principles that have been in effect in the past?

Is this serious? You just said "show me a solution, but NOT Reaganomics.". What kind of statement is that?

Reaganomics worked thats why progressives hate it so much. The reason why this country was able to create 20 million jobs and doubled the Federal Revenue iswhat they hated.

Supply-Side has ALWAYS worked, prove me wrong.


JFK's tax cuts worked in the '60's, Reagan's tax cuts worked, Bush's tax cuts in '01 and '03.


a better question is, show me where Obama's plan has EVER worked.

 

[blazinjkid]

The perfect storm.

 

[retr0sxual]

What is all this ***#%%%+? Politics bore me... someone spoon-feed me.

 

[deuce king]

Um, not everyone that watches Fox is a Conservative? Are you that dense, bro?


[table][tr][td]5p:[/td] [td]6p:[/td] [td]7p:[/td] [td]8p:[/td] [td]9p:[/td] [td]10p:[/td] [td]11p:[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]FNC[/td] [td]Beck:[/td] [td]Baier:[/td] [td]Shep:[/td] [td]O'Reilly:[/td] [td]Hannity:[/td] [td]Greta:[/td] [td]O'Reilly:[/td] [/tr][tr][td][/td] [td]704[/td] [td]552[/td] [td]484[/td] [td]826[/td] [td]701[/td] [td]653[/td] [td]512[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]CNN[/td] [td]Blitzer:[/td] [td]Blitzer:[/td] [td]Dobbs:[/td] [td]Brown:[/td] [td]King:[/td] [td]Cooper:[/td] [td]Cooper:[/td] [/tr][tr][td][/td] [td]254[/td] [td]224[/td] [td]209[/td] [td]147[/td] [td]322[/td] [td]332[/td] [td]274[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]MSNBC[/td] [td]Matthews:[/td] [td]EdShow:[/td] [td]Matthews:[/td] [td]Olbermann:[/td] [td]Maddow:[/td] [td]Olbermann:[/td] [td]Maddow:[/td] [/tr][tr][td][/td] [td]170[/td] [td]149[/td] [td]248[/td] [td]450[/td] [td]335[/td] [td]269[/td] [td]123[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]HLN[/td] [td]Prime:[/td] [td]Prime:[/td] [td]VMitchell:[/td] [td]Grace:[/td] [td]Dobbs:[/td] [td]Grace:[/td] [td]Showbiz:[/td] [/tr][tr][td][/td] [td]156[/td] [td]137[/td] [td]226[/td] [td]410[/td] [td]195[/td] [td]331[/td] [td]278[/td] [/tr][/table]

Just look at these.

These were from 4/14/09.

This is pathetic. But hey, that's what happens when you CEO sends money to a terrorist state like Iran.


The original question was posed to TBONE, but since you two share some of the same asinine sentiments at times I cansee why you responded to this statement. It's great that Fox News has higher ratings than other news organizations, that's good and all but obviouslywith their high ratings and viewership, it's quite clear to see that they (Fox News) was not able to push their agenda or even the Republican agenda hardenough to the American people given the 2008 Presidential election results. So in conclusion having high rating is good, but if your not making an impact whatdoes it really matter. I guess instead of having one of their own in the White House currently, the Republican party will just have to settle for half-assedTea Parties as a door prize.

Also, in regards to the CEO sending money to Iran, do you have anything negative to say about Ronald Reagan giving weapons to Al Qaeda to use against theSoviet Union, only for those same weapons to be used against Ameircan troops later on??

 

[seasoned vet]

- good ole TBONE.......

 

[jinkazama]

Is this serious? You just said "show me a solution, but NOT Reaganomics.". What kind of statement is that?


What exactly is the problem...Reaganomics got us here...so why exactly would we continue those same practices?

Reaganomics worked thats why progressives hate it so much. The reason why this country was able to create 20 million jobs and doubled the Federal Revenue is what they hated.


Reagonomics worked...for whom, Just like the Supply side economic theory...on paper, it would appear Reaganomics was successful. Strip away those emptynumbers and here is what you have...the THEORY is that you cut taxes on businesses and the wealthy and they will reinvest that money in job creation andexpanding their businesses. THE REALITY is that they horde a large percentage of that money and the jobs that are created are low wage, low skill jobs withlimited advancement. So yes under supply side econ job and wealth creation always appears to increase but in reality what you really create is a modern daycaste system of the have and have nots. Reagan's year's are a prime example. Just look at how america's inner cities were overrun with crime andthe proliferation of the drug trade.

Supply-Side has ALWAYS worked, prove me wrong.


Supply side has NEVER worked...see above.

JFK's tax cuts worked in the '60's, Reagan's tax cuts worked, Bush's tax cuts in '01 and '03.
See above... and the mere fact that you would mention the Bush cuts is almost laughable

a better question is, show me where Obama's plan has EVER worked.


You would be well served to study the economy of a little country called Aruba. In a nutshell, through the use of deficit spending they recovered after themajor driver of their economy faltered (oil). Today they enjoy one of the lowest unemployment and crime rates in the world and arguably the best quality oflife of any island in the carribean.

 

[essential1]

Fede what you forgot to post is they investigated LEFT WING also.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by Fede DPT

Originally Posted by JinKazama

Been lurkin' around this thread for a minute and actually got an opportunity to talk to some tea party cats on yesterday. I'll pose to this forum the same question I posed to them.

For the most part you had it your way for 8 years, yes I understand that you didn't agree with GWB's spending habits especially toward the end, but you had more of what you wanted with him than with Barack. Give me your solution for how to fix the mess we are in now that does not include the same supply side economic principles that have been in effect in the past?

Is this serious? You just said "show me a solution, but NOT Reaganomics.". What kind of statement is that?

Reaganomics worked thats why progressives hate it so much. The reason why this country was able to create 20 million jobs and doubled the Federal Revenue is what they hated.

Supply-Side has ALWAYS worked, prove me wrong.


JFK's tax cuts worked in the '60's, Reagan's tax cuts worked, Bush's tax cuts in '01 and '03.


a better question is, show me where Obama's plan has EVER worked.

well the debt that Reagan and Bush had. That where Reagan ruined Bush 1's presidency because he had to RAISE taxes after the problems Reaganleft in to economy... 2 look at the shambles our economy is in now. I'm not familiar with JFK's economic policy that well but if it did not have us inhuge debt then you proved your point on that.


Also times Obama's type plan worked on the Economy
Clinton (Clinton created 23 million jobs, so Clinton failed the economy?)
FDR (gloom and doomists he did end up taking us from garbage to a world superpower again. Under his watch so he did it. History has been written that way from90% of the sources. I'll bat with the side hitting .900 you can bat with the .100 team)


It cannot be one or the other just like our economy is set up (A Mixed Economy of Capitalism and Socialism.) both economic plans need to be used and balancedout.

 

[cadillacflow]

It's funny how any one who criticizes Obama or any of his policies is either salty from the election or a racist

 

[indiespice]

Originally Posted by DLo13

Cute.

Not Cute.