There once was a time that the Republican party was primarily composed of
Burkean conservatives (see Dwight Eisenhower). That era is long gone. The GOP is
now composed of the people that Burke feared the most: radical revolutionaries.
I've said it before, I'll say it again...The Tea-party
reminds me of a couple of scenes from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.1. The "Black Knight" who believes he is actually winning and is
invincible while obviously to everyone else is getting whacked down to
nothing.and2. The extremely ignorant (and paranoid) puritan
Villagers, who upon finding one of their own (a young woman) has one tiny little
wart - take it upon themselves to turn her into something she is not, and burn
her at the stake anyway.
Tea party lost in Virginia. Was the Senator Cruz-Lee shutdown the difference?
moderate republicans always win ie McCain, Romney. Nuff said?
@Airnaut, the witch scene is exactly what I see in my head when I hear or sea
the the tea party.Cruz: "Obama turned me into a
newt."..."I got better."To use a conservative defense.
The republican party allowed the camel (tea party) to get his his nose under
their "Big Tent." Now there's no room for the GOP especially rinos.
Don't sell it short. It was tactically AND symbolically disastrous. Oh, and
how about that Christie?
This is America. Re-alignment is the constant, but the age-old controversy
between liberty and equality rages on.On one side we have people who
value liberty more than any other principle. On the other side we have people
who value equality of outcome. America has tried with varying success to blend
these principles in a way which allows them to co-exist. When liberty prevails,
we prosper (and, by the way, we achieve greater equality).America is
beginning to see that the botched Obamacare blend is toxic to liberty. I
anticipate a widespread rejection of it. Enough to discredit Big Government for
all time? Probably not, but for many years, yes. Bad ideas have a way of
crawling back out of the dumpster of history.One thing is for
certain: as long as there is one person fighting for liberty, the tea party is
alive. The budget showdown may have been symbolic, but it did show us who are
the fighters, and who are the weasels.@airnut and one voteIf this is Monte Python, you're the guys loading up the wagon with people
who aren't dead yet.
@ HappyTo use a conservative defense. The republican party allowed
the camel (tea party) to get his his nose under their "Big Tent." Now
there's no room for the GOP especially rinos.And the Democrats
have Socialists/Communists and certainly a President who appears to have a
propensity for lying.No contest in my opinion!
mohokatOgden, UTYou know, You guys get soooo upset about
the hiccups of the Obamacare website, And yet can't seem to
remember the 2 Wars, 5,000 dead Americans, 75,000 wounded, and the $3 Trillion
unfunded doallars spent over the LIES of GWBush and Cheney.That old
mote vs. beam in the eye anaology applies here very well...
@mohokat – “moderate republicans always win ie McCain, Romney. Nuff
said?”They do when they stay true to their moderate
sensibilities. McCain and Romney destroyed any chance of winning when the made a
hard right turn, which they both did throughout the early parts of their
campaign but is best exemplified by McCain’s VP choice and Romney’s
47% comment.Most Americans, no matter which direction they lean,
don’t like divisive or overly-ideological leaders. I
personally can’t wait for Christie to run in 2016. Not sure I would vote
for him but it will be a blast to watch him thumb his nose (in his typical Tony
Soprano-like Jersey manner) at the far-right ideologues throughout the primary -
unless he repeats the mistakes of McCain and Romney and panders shamelessly at
Bob Jones “University” in a soul-selling but likely futile effort to
gain the White House.We’ll see if he’s gone to school on
those guys and stays true to himself.
"...On the other side we have people who value equality of outcome."No... that is not what is being asked. It is equality of opportunity.
While many of the barriers to prosperity have been removed, they are far from
gone. No one is asking everyone get a B in class... nor are they saying every
job should pay the same. But they are asking that all class rooms are taught
with the same resources, and that you not be denied work because of race, color,
religion or any other factor other than your skills or lack there of.Statements like above, that intentionally characterize the other side falsely
cause the most harm. Rather than trying to speak for the other side, speak for
yourself, and what you stand for. Let the other side speak for themselves...
and then let people decide.I don't need you to tell me what
progressives believe. I don't need progressives to tell me what tea party
people believe. Someone at some point will need to start telling what they will
do, rather than what the other side is doing wrong. Otherwise it will become
really quite - which isn't bad either.
"...The National Republican Senatorial Committee has cut ties with a
Republican advertising firm employed by tea-party challengers. "We're
not going to do business," says a spokesman, "with people who profit off
of attacking Republicans. Purity for profit is a disease that threatens the
Republican Party."People who profit off of attacking
Republicans?Who in the name of heritage foundation favorites mike
lee and t. cruz could that possibly be?"...Matt Kibbe, the
president and CEO of FreedomWorks, describes it well: "You're really
seeing a disintermediation in politics. ... Grass-roots activists have an
ability to self-organize, to fund candidates they're more interested in,
going right around the Republican National Committee and senatorial
committee...".Disintermediation?Matt Kibbe took over
for ex-president and CEO of Freedom Works Dick Armey who received an $8,000,000
golden parachute from Freedom Works...Freedom Works works(ed)...at
least for Dick Armey!"...As the public standing of the GOP
recently reached its lowest point ever, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told a cheering
tea-party audience, "Look, the Democrats are feeling the heat." It is
one thing to engage in Pickett's Charge; another to describe it as a
mohokatOgden, UTmoderate republicans always win ie McCain, Romney.
Nuff said?8:13 a.m. Nov. 6, 2013========= Let me guess, You think the Republicans keep loosing over and over again
and getting pasted in the General Elections because McCain and Romney
weren't "Conservative" [i.e., uber-far-right-wing Limbaugh, Beck,
or Hannity] enough?If so, you deserve to loose, each and
everytime.BTW -- Saint Ronald Reagan was RINO of epic
proportions.and guys like you would be the first to publically execute
@UtahBlueDevil "No... that is not what is being asked. It is equality of
opportunity."Equality of opportunity is to create laws which
apply equally to everyone, and enforce them equally for everyone, and then let
them decide for themselves how they will behave within that framework. If one
group ends up with health insurance, and the other group ends up with big screen
TV's, that's their choice. You let them live with the consequences.Equality of outcome is to do things like forcing one group of people to
pay higher prices for insurance plans they don't necessarily want, in order
to provide insurance for another group who doesn't have it.Which do you support?
@ TylerIf Christie runs in 2016 it will be interesting. Romney got over 2 million less votes than MaCainRomney got 5% more
Independents than ObamaThat translates to lack of base turnout.Chritie if he is listening will thumb his nose at his own peril
What was it called again by other Republicans:Stop being the Party
of Stupid - Gov. Bobby JindalThe GOP needs a GOP Proctology Exam - Gov.
Haley BarbourThe Democrats threw out former-Clinton, shady
investment dealing, never held an elected office - loser in Virgina and WON!The GOP has no-one --- not even the Democrats -- for their abismal
performance.IMHO -- The GOP should purge itself of the radical
Tea-Party, and start re-building itself on a more Big-Tent inclusive,
moderate platform, ala RINO Reagan.
@T. Party – “If one group ends up with health insurance, and the
other group ends up with big screen TV's, that's their
choice.”Implying that the “haves” and “have
nots” are actually all “haves” - the only real difference is
what they “chose” to have (likely a small amount of truth to
this).But if that was how it was in most of the real world (and not
just in an Ayn Rand novel) I would be Tea Party conservative too.@mohokat – “That translates to lack of base turnout.”Or a shrinking base…I’ll go out on a limb and
suggest that conservatives are dying off at a faster rate than liberals and
moderates, and conversely (given their current tone) are not replacing those who
pass on at a rate necessary to stay whole.But I agree, 2016 should
be an interesting campaign…
T.Party.... you really think part time employees at Walmart or Target are
deciding between insurance or a big screen TV. What comic book did that come
from?If you want to make this about health care.... what I want is
for everyone to pay so I don't have to pay a premium bill to cover the free
services that are being handed out via the emergency room door to those who
choose not to pay. With healthcare, the option is not to let
someone die because they bought a big screen tv versus paying for insurance.
That isn't how works, nor is it how it should work.Here is the
net of what I am taking from your argument. Its about your money. Not money
that you have been blessed with that is a stewardship... but it is money....
that you earned through your own skills and will.... and that you have no
responsibility to impart with to help those less blessed.Its not my
political beliefs that keep me from supporting that stance... it is my religious
@UtahBlueDevil "Here is the net of what I am taking from your argument. Its
about your money....that you have no responsibility to impart with to help those
less blessed."No, I believe exactly the opposite. I *do* have
the responsibility to help those in need. It is a moral responsibility I take
very seriously, motivated by my religious beliefs.What I don't
believe in, is granting government the power to compel this from me and others.
A government which has this power is a threat to life and liberty. As I said
before: I value liberty over equality of outcome. And it is evident from your
response that you value equality of outcome."what I want is for
everyone to pay so I don't have to pay a premium bill to cover the free
services..."So, it's about money? (Sorry...couldn't
resist. Can we agree that it's not helpful to impute motives?)Believe me, I do see where you're coming from on helping the poor. I also
believe strongly in preserving agency and individual liberty and personal
responsibility as we seek ways to help.
T. Party:True equality of opportunity would mean that everyone
starts at the same point. Would you agree?I would assert these
conditions simply don't exist. Some kids have considerable
advantages, and a lot of kids don't have anything remotely close to that.
If you really believed what you were saying, you'd advocate that
millionaires and billionaires give away all their money when they die, with no
money or resources going to their progeny as an advantage to continue the family
legacy of wealth.Those on the far right like to pretend there is
true equality in opportunity so they can feel better about what they advocate
for, but that is really just a fantasy, an unrealistic premise to justify an
ideology that results in great inequalities."The poor have
chosen their lot in lives. Homeless people really just prefer that lifestyle.
Children of immigrants have just as good a chance of becoming Billionaries as
anyone else, including the children of Bill Gates."Well, not
@T. PartyPleasant Grove, UTWhat I don't believe in, is
granting government the power to compel this from me and others.=====Too Funny, coming from someone on Social Security and
utahbluedevil: since you don't want to question motives, then it does come
down to something very simple. you want to use the power of the government to
compel citizens to be charitable. I believe that my charity is an individual
free choice! does that mean that I don't believe in charity? Absolutely
not and to question it is patronizing and disengenuus and worthy of my contempt
for anyone that does. so, if you want to have an honest discussion and
dialogue, you must have respect for my position or there will be no reason to
discuss it with you or anyone else! I prefer liberty over enslavement, choice
over compulsion, equality of opportunity over equality of outcome. freedom as
the pilgrims and founders envisioned it.
@10CC "True equality of opportunity would mean that everyone starts at the
same point. Would you agree?"Yes."I would assert
these conditions simply don't exist."And I agree with
that.What we don't agree on is what should be done about it. I
don't think we should grant the government power to take a man's
property when it decides he has too much and someone else has too little. This
road leads to tyranny.I value liberty over equality. If I understand
your argument correctly, you value equality over liberty. That's what this
whole argument is about, and has been since our founding. To me, it's the
difference between what motivated the American Revolution (liberty) and what
motived the French Revolution (equality). Observing how the two revolutions
ended up, I'd say America got it right.Whether y'all mean
to or not, you keep validating my earlier point.@airnautI do allow the government to take taxes for Social Security and Medicare as
the law requires. I don't expect to ever see a dime of it, as flimsy a
footing as these programs are on.
All the liberal progressives,Democrats, and socialists take on the Republican
party as if people like myself have been supporting them. The Republicans and
Democrats are all in one party together. It is a big party, all-inclusive, and
ready to take on any independent thinkers out there and label them as extremist
domestic terrorists. No one here has been able to tell me if there is any
difference between the two parties! They both want an all powerful government
that controls everything from the purse strings to moral choices! Pick your
favorite Democratic(Social programs) or Republican (war and corporate
welfare)ideals and you will find that in the end they all get what they
want--Bigger government that wants more and gives less! And yet, ironies of
ironies, both party zealots want to point the finger at the other party as the
one that is destroying America. What a joke! Mirror, mirror on the wall
who's the fairest of them all! Just keep looking in the mirror Democrats
and Republicans and I'm sure you'll find your true identity either
way--the reflection is the same! Two sides of the same coin!
Many of the posters on here calling republicans extremists remind me of Stalin
calling Eisenhower a radical.From some seats n the ballpark,
everything appears to be in right field.
@T. PartyPleasant Grove, UT@airnautI do allow the
government to take taxes for Social Security and Medicare as the law requires. I
don't expect to ever see a dime of it, as flimsy a footing as these
programs are on.====== but, isn't that the
whole premise that ALL insurance programs are based on?You buy it, and
then hope and pray you never need to use it?You don't but fire
insurance anticipating a fire, You don't buy collision insurance
anticipating a collision, You don't buy Home Insurance anticipating
loosing your home.You don't buy Accidental Death or Dismemberment
HOPING you die or loose an arm or leg.You buy insurance for peace of
mind - "Insurance" - that if anything catosptrophic DID happen, you can have it replaced or be compensated for your losses.Health
Insurance is no different, nobody buys it HOPING the get sick, get cancer,
or have a heart attack, but IF you do, won't loose your house, your
car, your savings, your retirement, your life's savings if you do.
@T. Party – “I don't think we should grant the government power
to take a man's property when it decides he has too much and someone else
has too little. This road leads to tyranny.And “I
do allow the government to take taxes for Social Security and Medicare as the
law requires.”Quite a bit of cognitive dissonance going on
here…What if we lived in a democracy and The People decided
that it was OK to tax them (us) to help others at the bottom end of the food
chain. Is that still tyranny?I understand your points about liberty
and believe me I get just as upset when I see people “working the
system” or otherwise making one bad choice after another, and whatever can
be done to get those people off the dole should be.I just
don’t feel like I’m the victim of tyranny because I agree to have my
wages taxed in order to help insure that we don’t have millions of
Americans spending their twilight years living under a bridge.
T. PartyPleasant Grove, UTWe don't get to pick and choose
what we decide to pay taxes on.I for one don't want to pay one
red cent to ANY of the GW Bush Wars or Corporate handouts!I hate
having to pony up my hard earned money for WallStreet executives, the Industrial
Military Complex, Pharmacuteical Industries, Oil Corporations and Farming
subsides, and doing so at a much higher income rate than Millionaires and
Billionaires.However, I don't mind at all paying for such
things as: Research and Developmet, Education, Welfare, Humanitarian aid,
Infrastructure, Public Utilities, Fire and Police protection. I
imagine we are probably polar opposites on these items, but that's
America and the differences between our 2 party system.I for one do
not see how freedom and liberty can be wholly Republican or Democrat controlled,
because we are arguing over MONEY, and not Speech, Religion, Press,
movement, privacy, gun ownership, ect.
The shutdown cost 6 Billion dollars.
How many people would be enraged if they were hit by an uninsured motorist? Is
it "tyranny" to be forced to buy auto insurance? And is the excuse that
"we can choose to drive" really a realistic response?