|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 … party.html
As well they should! In spite of that dumb a** Reid saying they are going away, they aren't! They will be a force to be recend with as anyone can see in these budget negotiations and in the republican candidates for president!
Democrats fear the Tea Party?
Tinkerbell Party isn't anything to worry about.
Thats what the currently unemployed democrat congressman thought.
And, I'm sure that they are still thinking the same thing that they were thinking when they lost their positions. They brought it on themselves, if they are no longer holding an elected position, because it's their own fault that they didn't do something to stop the sh!t going on in Congress, when they had the chance.
The Tinkerbell Party can enjoy some time for now, but like Republicans and Democrats, their time will be coming soon enough.
You mean the one who subsequently got an honorary chair at the local university, positions on boards of directors, and a local column in the paper and radio show?
Not a bad transition for being kicked out of congress.
Yes, fear the tea party. It could subsequently increase your income inadvertently.
They want Republicans to think they fear the Tea Party, because they know the Tea Party is too extreme to gain support from the moderates in most parts of the country. This is the same reason Obama just ignores the birthers. He knows birthers aren't gaining any traction, and it just makes his opponents look psychotic when they show support for the birthers. Bachmann and Trump have already fallen into this trap.
The Tea Party and birthers will ensure that Barack Obama gets reelected in 2012.
I honestly can't imagine how ANYONE with logical unbiased thought could reelect Obama. He has failed in every single category of leadership. The economy is a mess gas is heading over 4 dollars a gallon foreclosures still rising home values falling banking fees rising food prices rising wars raging confused foreign policy... the man
has been an EPIC fail! I can't imagine anyone wanting 4 more years of that!
Look, the economy and all the problems that come with it (home values, foreclosures, food prices, etc) are not his fault. These were problems set in motion before he even set foot in the White House, for God's sake.
keeping blaming! he had years and the democratic party has had 6 years already his policies are not working! stop making excuses for this failure. he is great as a community organizer not commander and chief. the defense secretary will be leaving shortly now.
Gas prices haven't been this high since the previous administration, lol. I'm not sure what Obama has to do with banking fees, unless you're suggesting the government should step in and interfere with a free market (come on, say it...).
The pull out from Iraq has been slow but steady. The pull out from Afghanistan will probably take much longer, because there really is no faction strong enough to suppress extremist activities without U.S. support. We're still testing the waters in Libya, mostly just firing missiles from a safe distance. Obama's biggest foreign policy failure is that he hasn't been able to correct the mistakes of the previous administration, and that's frustrating for all of us.
Like most presidential elections, we'll be voting for the lesser of two evils.
Who would be better, Michelle Bachman? How about Trump? It's sad but Pawlenty is the most viable candidate, but will not get the support from the far right, including the tea party. After that, who's really left who hasn't already wet the bed? Newt? Joke. Palin, COMPLETE Joke; Huckabe? Looks too much like Gomer Pile to be president.
The only real chance that repubs have is misinformation campaigns led by Rove's 527's. Good thing Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts led the charge on Citizens United and corporations can dump limitless money into political campaigns.
Here is what they don't say about Obama: First 2 years made good on 80% of campaign promises. No president in recent histiry can even come close to boasting that. Stock market is still doing very well. Obama is restoring America's place in the world, after it was destroyed by the prior administration. So really, where has he not shown leadership?
Now if you want to throw darts at things like gas prices, please do, because we have to ultimately remember the president who made us all think that it was ok to pay $3 a gallon for gas when he left office, after we were used to paying $1.25 when Clinton left. Oh, yeah, you are against regulation, so regulating futures trading, which is the reason forelevated gas prices, would be off the table, correct?
Foreclosures? Come on, you really don't read do you? Just check wit the Attorney General of Ohio (who is a republican), who is leading the charge against the banks for credit swaps and robo signing. That did not start in 2008. Is Obama also to blame for Bernie Madoff? After all, with your logical chain it would make sense, right?
Id love to see Bachmann or Palin as prsident, this country needs a strong, smart, confident, common sense women to run things! You men had your chance!
Smart and Bachman or Palin should NEVER be used in the same sentence.
It was Bachman who said that the founding fathers fought tirelessly to end slavery, right? So to her the Revolutionary War was the same thing as the Civil War, or is she jus tmaking her own version of the facts. The fact is this, the founding fathers owned slaves, and many of them would actually tie their slaves to the Liberty Bell during the Constitutional Convention. Not a pretty picture, but it's true.
Can't forget her trying to tie the Swine Flu to Democratic Administrations, when she said hte last time we had an outbreak was in the 70's during the Carter Administration. Or her hatred for Gay Marriage (which is on point with what republicans actually want to accomplish (right there with stripping a woman of her right to choose) This lady is either crazy or dumb as a box of rocks.
Now on to Palin, who with here x-ray vision sees Putin rearing his evil head...She is a flat out fabricator. I think she is truth challenged. Death Panels? Made up. She's also the one that says the real America is captured in small towns.
I really am not trying to knock either of these women.... they do it to themselves.
I know this image does not directly state what I wish to say, but it's close enough..
Glad to see that you're working hard for your money Lady of Unlove...
"Here is what they don't say about Obama: First 2 years made good on 80% of campaign promises."
And thats exactly why he will lose.
What are the real counter points? The Republicans are about 6-8 weeks away from having to actually have a plan that works in real life. If they don't seize on that opportunity, and do it well, they are done for 2012 at every level of government. You already see the Christie back lash in NJ, WI and OH will have their own set of ramifications as well. Boner, oh, meant Boehner is absolutely clueless, and has zero control over his caucus, and McConnell is powerless. So what's left?
Plus Obama is leading these folks down a dredded path, one that ends with the Repubs forced to confront their stances on policy iniatives. That will be a point of no return for them. Right now we are talking deficits, so Obama comprimised to extend the tax cuts that THEY wanted, even though it will cost $700B. Let's see if they will actually vote to do the responsible thing and raise taxes or come to grips with the notion that trickle down economics doesn't work. They are getting to that point now.
I totally agree. It seems like he and other democrats are intentionally bankrupting us with their big government. We need a Rand Paul or Marco Rubio in the white house. Working Americans have been sacrificing for a long time, we can take more. It's time for corporate America and the non working class to step up.
I wonder if both major parties are missing the message. When a 3rd party (or movement) gets this much attention, it's because a lot of citizens believe the major parties haven't been doing their job properly.
The Republicans have been spouting conservative spending while running up huge deficits on their watch. The national debt tripled under Reagan.
The Dems seem to think that not being Republican is enough of a platform.
The tea party may be a ragtag bunch of extremists, but the 2 parties should get a simple message: Many of the voters aren't happy with the status quo and they won't likely accept the idea of giving all power to one party or the other -- as a reward for gridlocking the gov't. That only lets those in power enrich and entrench themselves.
The tea party itself is too extremist to catch on with most people but it's the canary in the coal mine that's being ignored.
It's interesting why the Tea Party is often avoided by both parties. Democrats avoid confronting it because they oppose the policies it advocates and a vote for a Tea Party candidate is often a vote that would have otherwise gone to a mainstream Republican. Republicans avoid it because they know that in much of the country a move toward the Tea Party is seen as a move toward the far right, and it can cause them to lose the moderate, undecided vote.
If the Tea Party is able to grow, it's going to force the hands of Republicans. At some point they'll have to decide to either embrace it and hope they don't lose ground in the middle, or openly attack it and hope the Tea Partiers lack the resolve to fight back against a Republican if it means handing an election to a Democrat.
Good post. We do need new blood, but the Tea Party is a complete mess. It's impossible to have a real dialouge with them. Really is. If I hear, "America has to tighten its belt belt, Americans are doing it at home, so the Federal Government has to do the same", I think I am going to jump off of the Capitol dome. Look, America tightend their belt to the last hole back in 2000 when we passed the largest tax cuts in history. Tax cuts are essentially a revenue reduction to the government. Then we fight 2 unfunded wars; pass a windfall prescription drug plan (that was also unfunded) then extend the revenue reduction (there were 2 extensions of the tax cuts), and now we want to talk deficits, and about cutting services? What a joke.
There have been other parties around for a long time. Independent, Green, Libertarian, Constitution.....
Problem is, they aren't big enough, and the Dem and Repub national committee's usually keep them out of debates.
Tea-Party got attention because of the Big Money behind it.
AND the media!!
For example; I heard on the radio...can't remember what city, but there was a HUGE pro-union/anti-Tea-Party rally somewhere, and it got NO coverage whatsoever.
Meanwhile, a 100 Baggers show up, and it makes national news...all channels, all outlets.
Liberal media my behind.
The republican party's relationship with the tea party is, as the Russians say, "Like having a wolf by the ears." Who has who?
The moderates have a delicate balancing act to maintain if the conservative wing is going to stay on board. On the other hand, you can just see the democrat's political ads showing the circus atmosphere of teabagger rallies, including misspelled signs, racist remarks and add some pickin' from "Deliverance."
Remember, that's what political ads are these days, a drive-by shooting of half truths and fabrications.
Tea party? The democrats best friend.
I'm really getting tired of hearing the tea party refered to as "extremeist". What's extreme about their mission:
Constitutionally limited government
These are laudable goals and they are espoused by everyone - all parties. It sounds nice.
For the Tea party, add in paranoia (Obama the muslim, Obama not from the U.S., get rid of all government...).
The tea party will remain a fringe party unless it cools the rhetoric about taking back the country by "ballot or bullet."
If you're going to assign those arguments to all of the tea party then its fair for me to claim the democrats are racists based on my other post.
What about the by "ballot or bullet" bunch?
Apparently! Lol! One guy with a sign does not a party platform make. It's possible he was a liberal operative posing as a tea party member. Makes sense when you consider his sign was a quote from Malcolm X.
Sure. He may be a paid dirty-tricks operative, it's quite common and has been for quite awhile. (Remember Nixon's train speech)?
The point is that this is going to show up in the opposition's political ads and will not help the Repubs at all. The tea party is the Dems best friend and Republicans should forget trying to incorporate them into the fold.
Republicans have enough of their own explaining to do w/o the baggers.
Republicans aren't bringing them into the fold they are pushing their way in! If you think the tea party is good for dems stay tuned in 2012!
I'm hoping to see a factual debate between the parties which would be based on real reforms that must be made. I know, maybe I'm dreaming.
If the pols. want to lessen cynicism and mistrust among the voters, then their thinly veiled pandering to their backers must stop.
It's really, really important.
How about this, and it should end the semantics, AMERICA IS RACIST. There it's out and you have it. Not one party or the other. During the 20th Century, America killed, and/or exploited more non-whites than any other nation Thats irrefutable.
America is Racist compared to what? And, if so, so what? And, why are so many of the immigrants not white? Are they coming here to get oppressed? Ain't nobody gives a crap about Racist charges, nobody cares because it is not true.
America is racist by definition. There is no larger unspoken Anerican credo, than "exploit darker skinned people at every opportunity". You can't refute that. Whether is was the killing of the natives for their land, or slavery, or the fact that the last time we sent a ground troop to a country that was primarily cacuasian, was WWII.
We ask where are the jobs? :ppl no further than a corner of the earth where American corporations can get non-whites to work for pennies on the dollar. Wasn't that the underlying reason for NAFTA and CAFTA? If not please enlighten me.
Now moving to your Census based question, first it doesn't speak to racism, rather you seem to be saying that since America allows non-whites to emmigrate then we are not racist as a country. Well that assertion is flawed. If you want to proport this, then you have to bring the issuance of visas and political asylum into the conversation. The problem here, is this makes your point more moot. If you go country by country, who was granted political asylum the most? Indivicuals from the former Soviet Union. Who gets the most education visas, India, who gets the most work visas, Ireland. So again, your point of is moot. Read a book. Those words actually come together to mean something after a few pages.
There is no bigger cop out than to say America is not a racist country.
Ground troops were sent to Bosnia/Herzegovina to stop the Christians from committing genocide against Muslims. That was back in the 1990's. Besides the above, where else would the US need to send troops in which the country is mostly white. Canada, Austrailia and Western Europe are the only places I can think off that have communites that are primarily white and they generally speaking do not commit genocide or terrorists acts against their own or others. So why would we need to intervene?
Racism doesn't need comparison, you either are or you aren't.
Although I think the US is improving it's still racist.
Why are so many immigrants not white, that again proves nothing. I'd ask what Islamaphobia is if it isn't racism.
I'd ask why a disproportionately small number of coloured people hold high office or rank amongst the top earners, and a disproportionate high number hold menial jobs.
Racism doesn't need comparison, you either are or you aren't.
Although I think the US is improving it's still racist.
Why are so many immigrants not white, that again proves nothing. I'd ask what Islamaphobia is if it isn't racism.
I'd ask why a disproportionately small number of coloured people hold high office or rank amongst the top earners, and a disproportionate high number hold menial jobs.
you are racist! you are an anti-Semite.
many more are non white because they are escaping socialist/communist countries and want the opportunity to be successful and not stagnant. or to escape the Islam sharia law which degrade woman which so so protect!
as for the people of color, well I do believe Oprah is the richest woman in America and built an Empire. look her up I do believe you will see color! as for the rest..I see a lot of Black Millionaires, and you simply forgot that slavery ended only a few decades ago and they have made tremendous progress! but you are just spewing your socialist opinions again and show your true colors. and for EVERYONE else if they were hungry and devoted as a OPRAH look what this great country can do for you! but your to lazy and blinded by your socialist upbringing to notice and I'm starting to believe your jealous because your UK is not like this.
Exactly, slavery only ended a few decades ago.
What do you base your accusation of racism and anti-Semitism?
Oprah is one, name me ten more popular figures?
Thank f*** the UK is not like that.
I base it on your words from another topic about Israel and you blasting them. do you forget what you wrote? If these are your feelings you should certainly know your position.
Michael Jackson, he was black and was alive recently! Michael Jordan, Russell Simmons, Charles Barkley, Sean Combs, Denzel Washington, Spike Lee, colon Powell, morgan freeman, chris rock.and do not forget the president of the United states is black also. many many more can be named!
Well seeing as I've never made any comment on Israel, let alone blast them, I can only think that you've been at the funny juice again. My understanding of the situation in Israel is not up to speed, therefore I avoid any and every discussion on it.
Most of your list are entertainers, not heavy weight politicians or captains of industry. America has always had room for black entertainers (though not in the same buildings as whites.
Your president is mixed race and more white than black, but go on, seeing as you're scraping, I'll grant you him.
Danny, Come on man... Really? Are we living in 1984? Can you even name 10 (as you say) socialist/comunist countries? Oprah is also a bad reference. Black folks have always been able to make money in entertainment. Look no further than Josephone Baker, Billie Holiday, or any other prominent jazz musian who were allowed to play the clubs, but couldn't go in the front door. In fact many of these individuals would frequent France so they could be afforded full human rights. I won't even tell you to read a book on this one, just watch Ray. Remember the stpry arund Georgia? How long ago was that?
Our sense of history as a people is appauling. That is how you guys continually have the wool pulled over your eyes by these right wing talking heads, because they don't expect you to fact check them, or even "remember" what happened a few years ago.
you talk about me living in 1984 but your bringing up nopt being able to walk in the front door! what is that the 40's?????? please with the nonsense! why are entertainers disqualified? because you say so? there are many black doctors, lawyers, business owners etc... please do not give me that BS. Oh we have a black president also!
as for the socialist/communist countries, Most of Europe is socialist! Greece, UK, etc... Cuba, North Korea, Libya, some African nations. you can not be that stupid to not know this how about Most Middle eastern countries, woman are $hit! can not vote, stoning to death etc... Iran. please like I said ANYONE who is hungry enough can achieve anything here! if your lazy and do not finish school or do things to better yourself instead of drink and smoke and party that is your tough luck! why should someone have to pay for you! that is what your suggesting!
UK a socialist country! You really have no idea do you?
Yes the UK can be called socialist from all your government giveaways! that is why you fools are rioting in the streets
Like I said, you really have no idea do you?
40"S, try upping that by atleast 2 decades, 3-4 in certain areas of the country. True story, there was a 6 foot by 6 foot cross burned on the middle of my undergrad campus with N**ers go jpme spray painted on the ground in front of if in 1995. So again we are not very far removed. Entertainers aren't disqualified, but one thing is certain in every empire, the slave can make money by entertaining the masses. True in Rome, True in the British Empire, and sadly, true in America.
I won't take away the fact of the black professionals, as I am living proof, however, because a few make it through doesn't mean that the problem no longer exists. I think you are missing that part. Cornell West and Henry Gates wrote a great book about that called losing the race. The premise is that we have in America today, the largest black middle class, and the largest black lower class simultaneously in American history. So, yes for every me, there are 5 like me in poverty.
UK is parlementary, so wrong there. Greece, has a communist party but is not a communist country, so wrong. Lybia is a dictatorship, so wrong again. Iran, completely wrong. N. Kprea I will give you, Cuba, yes. There is also not one communist nor socialist country in the middle east.So out of 5 countries, and "some parts" of 2 other continents, you only got 2 correct. Do you know what communism and socialism are? Just asking because that may be where the disconnect resides.
I love your "bootstrap comment as well. I want to believe in that. However, I see different. In the city where I live the public school has a drop out rate of 53%. If you look at minorities it's much worse, 56% pf blacks drop out, and nearly 70% of hispanics. So they are just lazu, huh? I won't adress the other parts because I am already sure that I pay alot more for people's decisions than most people, and that is because I went to school (in multiple countries), have 3 advanced degrees, and still see the system for what it is: untair, exploitive, racist.... shall I go on?
I think you missed the point, You said your successful...that is great! question why are you successful? I'm sure you busted your a$$ to accomplish what you achieved! and if more people were like you, and I would also put myself in that circle. If many more would be as ambitious we would not be having this discussion. We have the greatest country in the world and anyone willing to put in the dedication will succeed. as for racism that will always exist! you will always have a handful of people who are like this..White, Black Asian etc... If you think about it if we had a real racism problem we would not have Obama in Office. you needed many white people to vote for him to win!
as far as socialist and communist countries I do know the difference I got ahead of myself with the Middle eastern countries and I also believe a dictatorship is similar to a communist country as it feeds most of the people. they are not free
A dictatorship is the exact opposite of communism, so you are still off base. I am fortunate to come from the family that I do. Most kids, especially inner city youth, are not as fortunate. They aren't lazy, they just don't have direction. Often they do, in fact bust their a$$es, but for the wrong things. Unlike them, I had a home to go to after school, where I would get snacks, dinner, and someone would check/help wit hhomework. Many one these kids, lunch at school is the last real meal that they get during the course of a day. Further, many don't know how their night is going to be. So don't give me that bootstrap bs. Its completely tired now. This is a real and serious problem that you are saying that people have to fix for themselves. What a load of crap. This is a national security provlem. Every public school district in the nations 10 largest cities (whici also accounts for nearly 65% of the population) has a failing school system. So (now here is the history lesson part for you) with these kids who drop out at a 50% clip, they will amount to close to 40% of the population who doesn't have a hidhschool diploma. When was the last time in US history where less 70% of the population didn't have one? Talking about going back decades. Put it this way, Nixon wasn't President yet. Then compound that with our employment situation, we don't have many low and semi-skilled positions available. Further at current trends, the ones we have now will be gone by the time rgar half of today's kinfergardeners drop out. So then what will we have?
It really starts with us. What example do we set as adults? By not telling the truth, and spouting misinformation, we are not setting a good example.This is what the repubs, are doing. In the words of Bill O'Riley, they are not news men, they are provokateurs. Meaning they deliberately try to get folks riled up on bs
I guess the ones who do make it out are just lucky! they did not work hard. Your right when you say we need to guide kids to what is right and what is wrong. Why have kids if you can not afford them? even kids that have terrible parents become wonderful pillars of society! this is BS. If you can not take care of the 2 you already have why have 2-4 more??? is this logical? I see more propaganda on MSNBC then any other station! this is fact. So I see fox has the biggest audience for what reason? why is MSNBC's rating suck? because people see through the nonsense. Fox definitely leans right but has many left analysis on more than I can say for MSNBC. Cnn is like Fox but leans Left so I watch both of them and get the info to see which I believe. Again when someone wants to move forward and really puts the energy in they will get there. I'm all for helping but not make people rely on it! people take advantage of the system. Today you have everything in place for the minorities to advance...more student aide, much easier to get into a school. affirmative action which takes minorities even though others receive higher scores. I guess all this is not even enough.... never satisfied! give a finger take an arm...right the more you get the merrier.
Fiscal responsibility while ignoring the one major budget item: the defense budget. Also, advocating tax breaks for the rich when deficits are running at record levels.
Constitutionally limited government, except on social issues, where they seem to want the government to be an extension of the Baptist church. Also, Constitutional rights only apply to Christians and Jews, but not Muslims, Atheists and many others.
Free markets, except where they can benefit from government intervention. Farm subsidies are about as anti-free market as you can get, but I have yet to see the Tea Party protest them.
No one realistically thinks the defense budget can't be cut. Keep in mind the nations defense is essential to maintaining our freedom and is an enumerated power.
The constitution guarantees freedom of religion. Sure there are christians in the tea party but that doesn't mean they want to impose those values on all.
Obama just renewed ethanol subsidies. This was for farmers partgicularly in Iowa to garner support for the elections. I don't think you can say the tea party is for subsidies but you can say that the republicans and democrats agree on them.
Fiscal reponsibility also means a fair tax policy and spending in line with revenues. No one is advocating for the rich.
I wouldn't go as far as extremeist, because you actually have to believe in something to be extreme. The Tea party is the bi-product of the American Instant Gradification fixation. Their lack of depth, or real knowledge of the issues will sink them before anything else can.
Find a more productive way to spend your day than endless hours of fear mongering and lying online.
You'll sleep better and wake up refreshed. Hell, you might even learn to interact with carbon-based lifeforms.
Extremist? Ok, let's try a few
1. Their campaigns were funded by foreign bank managers, and secretly.
2. They have almost the exact same political platform as that of the Ku Klux Klan.
3. Openly calling for armed insurrection and showing up to rallies armed with automatic rifles is also something I consider extreme.
Trump may not win the election but his talking points will get attention from the national media.
O'bama is in for some discussion coming his way.
If anyone is serious about budget cutting, it's pretty obvious where you have to go.
1. Military spending
The middle east will have to be left to find it's own way. Countries like Japan and Germany are capable of their own self defense.
There needs to be a "means test" for Soc. Sec., Medicare, etc.
Proposed cuts are always easier if someone else will make all the sacrifices. Addressing the above issues can't be done by cutting NPR or raising (someone else's) taxes. None of this is new -- it's been discussed for years. Discussed with no one willing to risk the political fallout from doing what must be done.
Whatever the T Partly might have been originally, like a movement against the robber barren bankers - "GOP Plan Destroys Medicare; Guts Care for Poor, Disabled" - this is what it is now.
"That's just hyperbole and rhetoric by demcorats". How could you be more wrong?
'That's just hyperbole and rhetoric by'
- Me. Or am I an idiot?
"Obama just renewed ethanol subsidies. This was for farmers partgicularly in Iowa to garner support for the elections. I don't think you can say the tea party is for subsidies but you can say that the republicans and democrats agree on them."
From Mar 3, 2011:
• Last month, President Obama has proposed ending big oil subsidies.
• This week, Congressional Democrats voted to end big oil subsidies.
• And this week, House Republicans unanimously voted to protect big oil subsidies. (3.6 Billion dollars).
Oil and gas get even more of your money through tax incentives, deductions, depreciation and investment credits. Those total about $3.6 billion a year, according to the Administration.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/0 … -subsidies
Stuff like this is why we have deficits.
"Obama just renewed ethanol subsidies." Burn food for fuel. The humanitarian intervention is a wonder to behold.
"AMERICA IS RACIST." If you are going to exploit people for your own gain, racism is as good an excuse as religion or some other inferiority.
"with logical unbiased thought could reelect Obama." Don't matter he is already re-elected. What ya got one choice against. Gee wonder what sort of moron it will be. What is the best dressing?
he is already re-elected? do you know something the rest of us don't? do you not remember the last election? things have gotten worse since then and he has made many more mistakes. take those blinders off.
Lets go mistake for mistake, between Bush and Obama, then tell me one viable republican candidate that can last the primary season without cancelling themselves out?
Bush is pretty easy: 9/11 (no mistake gets bigger than that); WMD (I will give you a $3Trillion mistake on that because I don't want to call him a liar); Sitting on the sidelines hoping to finish out his term amid a financial melt down? How about the 2 1/2 pageTARP bill? How about the fact that over $20B is lost or unaccounted for from that executive order? do I really have to go on? Obama - not ending tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (but I think this was to give repubs enough rope to choke themselves); Waiting for a coalition before airstrikes in Lybia? I'm still digging for the real mistakes. Please again, enlighten me.
what the F does Bush have to do with Obama? he has not been president in 3 years! the congress had majority for 7 years?
Bush did not cause 9/11 that is FACT! the AFGHAN war is justifiable...Fact OSAMA Al-Quada
Iraq was a monumental mistake which I have always said!
The housing was a democratic mistake ...Barney Frank and DODDS.
they pressured banks to make loans to people who could not afford them! If you actually looked it up you will see this is also fact and Clinton started it. And I loved Clinton! I actually voted for Hillary in the primary.
as for Obama, He apologizes and makes the US look weak! epic fail with health-care! disastrous and if you actually read it and agree with it you need to go back to school. Yes a few things are good and what is needed but overall it is one big disaster.
His foreign policy is the worst this man does not have a clue! Hillary was quitting because he is so weak. Gates will be stepping down very shortly you will see, the man has a lot of integrity and is fed up and does not want to make the president look even more stupid! look at his statements from the last 4-6 weeks. He bows to Muslim leaders!
his economic plan did not work! unemployment went up even though 700B was injected!
everyone sees him taking vacations when important matters are at hand. then to top it off his wife has to invite 40-50 people along on the vacation while people are struggling here.
the man is a liar and wants to change what America stands by. he gives money to south America to drill but not smart enough to allow drilling here to bring down the cost of oil! 2012 can not come fast enough
All you watch is Fox, huh? No clue on foriegn policy? Is that because he actually used a coalition for air strikes? Because he didn't send anyone to Egypt? Is that really a mistake?
Gates should be gone already, he was a holdover to make sense of how F-ed up the two wars actually were. To this day he is still cleaning up Rummey's mess. Hilary is and was going nowhere, so stop with that load of bs.
\\Bows to muslim leaders? That is just dumb.
Uneployment is here to stay, largely because (ready for it) Americans are dumb and unemployable. The down turn was a green light for corporations to clean house, and get rid of the dead weight. That is a new factor of life. So that said, tell me again why you don't want a government safety net? If you think differently, please explain, but be forewarned that you are already digging a hole for yourself, with the $700B comment, because over 60% of that was in the form of tax cuts, which the repubs say are supposed t create jobs.
Liar? WMD, do you really want to go there? That cost over $3T already and continues to grow.
Lastly, give me one viable republican candidate. Just one.
First is that all you have? No I watch and READ everything I'm not like you who swear by MsNBC and I'm a democrat!
Dumb because you say so???? it was a disgrace to America to bow to a religious Muslim leader!
I know plenty about foreign affairs obviously you do not! now you want to blame Bush for everything. that is the biggest joke! get over it your boy is nothing but a community organizer.
oh and Hillary is wrong too now that she does not agree with the OH MIGHTY ONE! and If you can read correctly I do not need a safety net! you socialist do! I'm all about taking responsibility for my own actions!
the majority of the money went to bailout! get your facts straight! and it cost California 250k for each of the 18 jobs they created!
On the WMD, again what does this have to do with Bush???? keep the blaming! Obama has to take responsibility for his own actions!
who is a viable candidate for Obama....ANYONE!!!!! remember the last election? or do you conveniently forget??
It's never all I have. I can go on for days, but you true believers are hard to crack. It's like you have your own version of the truth.
Not dumb becaue i say so, you don't need me for that, you do a great job on your own. Is it a disgrace for the American President to bow to the Pope? Didn't think so. It is a custom, and when you go to someone elses homeland you abide by their custom. So that is flat out some weak stuff.
He could be my boy, but it makes your skin crawl that he has 2 ivy league degrees, and was a millionaire before running for president. Say it, you hate him why... we almostgot to the real issue.
Who said anything about Hilary being wrong? You said she was leaving, and my response was you were wrong. So that is just made up, but typical. Believe me , for sheer self preservation, you should feel glad that there is a social safety-net. I already ran down the socialist thing in recent posts, so please provide me with substance. Because again, your argument is weak.
What does WMD have to do with Bush? You can't even be serious about that. Wasn't that the initial reason to go after Sadam? That was a $3T lie. Also that lie cost thousands of lives. Bush had nothing to do with that though, huh? I can already hear it, but, the US was not attacked on Obama's watch. The US economy didn't crash on Obama's watch, nor did the housing bubble, nor did Bear Sterns collapse. So you might want to get a demo version of Time Map, and create a timeline of events before you proport such BS.
Last elsection, was decides by Citizens United. Endless 527 (you probably don't know what those are either) funds went into misinformation campaigns. Thats all. The American People, as evidenced herein, are not engaged in the political process. The Repubs did a great job of putting together soundbites for our intellectually challengef populace. That is what happened in the last election. Also in mid-terms turnout is always much lower, so we are not talking "The American People". Now, again, give me one viable candidate,, You say anyone, because you just want Obama out of office, but you still have great difficulty artivulating exactly why.
well I believe your info is wrong. I can go all day also. as far as the POPE he would not bow to him as he went to the UK and didn't bow to the queen, why not? maybe that is why he was not invited to the wedding. maybe small to you but I take pride in the USA.
Now when you have nothing to put meat and potatoes on your trying to say what? I'm racist? LMAO far from it! I could make more of a case for black people being racist. Many admitted to not knowing anything about policies of Obama but voting because he was black. is that not racist? 7% of blacks did not vote for Obama does that make them racist? Just because I do not like him for his way of thinking and policies make me a racist? anyone who believed him when he said he did not know reverend Wright spoke like that and went to that church for 20 years and dedicated a book to him is a LIAR!!! Wright preaches Anti-American BS and I personally do not think we should have a president who believes like that! and his actions show this...the reason why he apologizes for America, The bowing to a Muslim Leader. Not taking the initiative in Libya because like his book states he does not want people to think we are invading a country. It is crystal clear what he believes and that is not what this country is about. who does he surround himself with? all socialist, admitted socialist...why would you associate and make people who you do not agree with be part of your team? again what does bush have to do with Obama? all you do is Blame bush for Obama's failure. I said Bush did wrong with Iraq and Have been blasting Bush for years! I hate Bush!!! Am I a racist for hating him too? you have your rose colored glasses on and that is your prerogative, another reason this country is so great.
Danny, your country is great in size. That counts for nothing else, it doesn't automatically follow that your foreign policy is great, nor your domestic policies are great.
It's time to stop resting on your laurels and face up to reality.
Obama was not snubbed by not being invited to a private wedding, neither was he diminished by showing respect.
In your socialist eyes they weren't. How come other presidents were invited? how come he did not bow to your Queen? The only reason our country is losing some values is because your socialism is bringing it down! who are you to say what my country is? 10.00 a gallon for gas in the UK to help pay for social programs. I do not want that here sorry.
What other presidents were invited? Friends and family.Sorry, you can't make a snub where it isn't intended.
Who am I to say what your country is? An outside observer without an axe to grind and with no agenda, try it some time.
Fuel is not $10 a gallon to pay for social programs, unlike the US we do not take all the costs of motoring out of general taxation, unlike you, we aren't that socialist.
Still... no candidate? Still... No substance. I like how you picked up on the race thing though, and get so heated about it. Is it because, again, you have no substance, and have been shut down because pretty much everything you have been saying has been false? If it's not race, what don't you like? Give me one fact. It could even be because he wears blue suits on Tuesdays, but really dude, you are about waiste deep, with no sighns of digging yourself out.
Again, and please let this be for the last time, America was never set up to be a pure democracy, but a society that weaved different social structures for the betterment of it's peopls. For instance, at one time regular folk were not able to vote for Senators,, nor directly for the President. Thus, it pretty much made us a democratic republic. Then, when Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations proved that it was not the cure all for America, we began, as a country to espouse some forms of socialism. Again, not in it's purest sense, but I don'tthink you'd know the difference anyway. This is out of the moral (because the country was built on good ole Christian values) obligation to take care of it's people. The standard first came out of Britian with Elizabethian poor laws (we can go for days on that too, but it pretty miuch said this, help your less fortunate, but they should not receive in aid more than the lowest wage erner). Then domestically things really got bad when good old Herbie (who could be considered the grandfather of the tea party) drove us into Depression. The only things that helped recover our country were government intervention and WWII.
DUDE if you can not read that is not my problem! I stated very clearly that it is his policies and his way of thinking! Funny how you just picked out the race card! that is all you do. you have no substance and blindly leave out why I do not like him. Anyone with a brain could see you meant RACE! then you try to exploit it. sorry I'm on to that stupid tactic it has been played too long especially when someone doesn't get their way. you are the racist one obviously! I only get heated when nonsense comes up, something your too blind to see. keep blaming race if that makes you feel better! If you only knew me you would know how ridiculous your comment is. That my friend is the true sign of ignorance. Me racist... now that is funny!
Libelous Left Shows True Colors during Wisconsin Protests
Threats. Violence. Racism. Extremist rhetoric. Liberal activists are doing exactly what the Left and the media falsely accused the tea partiers of doing.
In the April issue of Townhall Magazine, Mary Katharine Ham takes on the hypocrisy of the American Left that loves to falsely accuse conservatives of violent rhetoric but then engages in it frequently. They are the two-faced liberals who make up the modern progressive movement, and they have brought about what Ham calls "The Swift Death of the New Tone."
Andrew Breitbart combats the mainstream media and it's libelous antics in his new book, Righteous Nation, He explains that the Tea Party had successfully defended the attacks by the media and the Democratic Party and would become the machine that radically altered the American political landscape. "What had started exclusively as an anti-intrusive, limited government, political movement had naturally evolved into something more all-encompassing and cultural. With Tea Partiers stealing from the left-wing playbook, conservatives had begun to learn the value of showing up, being vocal, and acting local, NOT threatening, violent, or racist." Read all about it when you order Townhall Magazine and receive your free copy of "Righteous Nation."
A child's handwritten sign that reads "We hate Scott Wacre" is seen taped to a wall in the rotunda during protests against budget cuts proposed by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, R, at the state Capitol in Madison. The "new tone" the Left has been demanding from conservatives was nowhere to be seen during the union protests. (Reuters/ Darren Hauck)
Remember the days, in August of 2009, when conservatives merely raising their voices at health care town halls portended the sure destruction of the Republic? There were large numbers of conservatives gathering peacefully (and, yes, sometimes angrily) to express their discontent with Obama's health care law. The media decided these protests were threatening and dangerous on their face.
The mere gathering together of conservatives critical of the president caused Chris Matthews to sputter and Rachel Maddow to whine about the closed-minded, racist and surely violent crowds that would be the undoing of the Union. The only problem was there wasn't much violence to speak of.
During the most heated month of the health care uprising, when more than 500 town halls took place over one month across the country, there were exactly 10 instances of documented violence. Most of them were confined to the ripping of signs and minor tussles (though there were a handful of punches thrown), and seven of 10 incidents were perpetrated by ObamaCare supporters on protesters, according to photos, police reports and witnesses.
Nonetheless, the media kept up its "Climate of Hate" narrative through 2010, tsk-tsking over the tone of protest posters, often erroneously blaming tea partiers for Lyndon Larouche activists' Hitler signs and generally making a giant, scary deal out of the least errant word from any right-leaning protester in any place at any time.
There was evidence in 2009 that the stringent requirements for polite protest were not going to apply to everyone. Concurrent with the health care protests that made the media to tremble with their ferocity, the international community held the G20 gathering in Pittsburgh. There, a collection of liberal and anarchist protesters did approximately $50,000 of damage to local businesses, and 190 of them were arrested for blocking traffic and rolling trash bins and throwing rocks at police.
The CBS headline for that story? "Police fire gas on G20 protesters."
By 2011, the "violent right-wingers" narrative took its most irresponsible turn yet and blamed Sarah Palin's political speech for the shooting of Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Ariz. Giffords is recovering, praise God, after being shot in the head by a mentally ill man who had been fixated on her since at least 2007. To this day, there is no evidence that he was motivated by anyone’s political rhetoric, martial words or imagery. The 28-page federal indictment of Jared Lee Loughner does not mention Palin's now-infamous crosshairs map as a cause of the incident because it wasn't.
Nonetheless, the country was called by all of national media to a time of soul-searching about our "tone." There should be a new tone, they said, and President Barack Obama echoed that in his Tucson speech saying our rhetoric should "honor" those who had been killed while engaging in our democratic process in that Safeway parking lot.
Several right-leaning pundits joined the call to civility, giving credence to the idea that rhetoric and Loughner's crime were somehow connected -- among them David Frum, Joe Scarborough and Jeb Bush.
But the new tone didn't last long. After all, it could last only until it was necessary for liberals to protest again, at which point all the rules imposed on conservative activists would be swiftly jettisoned in favor of celebrating the "passion" of those who carry Hitler signs for "justice."
You sure don't sound like any Democrat I know. You stick up for W, and you like Bachmann-Turner-Overdrive?
And seem to have major hate for BO.
I'am a democrat and do not stick up for W I hate him! BS war in Iraq that caused damage to this country. I do like Bachman. I also like Clinton, and Dennis K, so?
Ok--I have to take you at your word...I just don't get that Democratic feeling from you.
And,a as a Dem and a woman....I think Overdrive SUCKS!
I have no reason to lie. Check my other posts I blame a lot of this mess on Bush and Iraq! People say I'm a Reagan Democrat...that is fine by me. I like fiscal responsibility and helping people but not making them rely on it. also I'm not talking about the handicapped or the elderly. we should be there for them all the time. as far as Obama he never wanted to work with the republicans, he said they can come along for the ride and sit in the back of the bus, slammed through that disastrous health-care bill and some other nonsense and you can honestly say he tried? yes after the whipping in the last election he caved in to the tax break. I do not like his way of thinking and policies. I was truly hoping he would do the right thing but he let me down. I voted for Hillary in the primary and thought she would be what we needed as Clinton did a great job! one of my favorite presidents. I truly do not think people realize how bad things really are! If these people ran a business like they run the country they would be broke and in JAIL.
By the way, can anybody tell me how much students have to pay for university in the US?
depends on the school. cummunity college is about 3500 a semester state school 12k ivy league about 23k
sorry state is 12k a year 2 semesters and ivy league is 26k a year 2 semesters, not counting room and board for state school
My oldest, after a scholarship of $18,900 PER YEAR, is borrowing another $17,000 A YEAR to attend a small, private university in Ohio. Yeah... with books, etc. etc. you're looking at close to $40,000 per year.
Too much and judging from what is coming out of universities these days John it is a complete waste of money.I am not too impressed with these Ivy Leaguers right now.
"Nearly half of all Americans have an unfavorable view of the Tea Party movement, putting it in the same company as the Democratic and Republican parties, according to a new national poll.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Wednesday indicates that 32% of the public have a favorable view of the two-year-old anti-tax movement, which also calls for less government spending and a more limited role for the federal government in our lives.
The 32% favorable rating is down five points from December. "
The key stat is the trend. Nearly 2% per month are learning how the teabaggers are an unwitting and generally witness front organization for the American aristocracy. The new Ryan Plan shreds any illusions by simultaneously cutting taxes for the top tier while balancing the budget on the backs of Seniors by eliminating Medicare.
The expectation of the GOP seems to be that the weakening conservative momentum will still carry old folks, who can't see or hear too well, past the fine print of the new deal which casts (non-wealthy) seniors into a miserable old age without any security.
I guess the last election did not mean anything?
It did to YOU.
Just as Obama did to others!
But, the conserves completely destroyed any hope there was for coming together in a new way, for America.
It was there for a minute....all the excitement, the happiness that Dems and Repubs were working together, going to try new things...
It didn't last long.
So now, we have the slash-and-burn the poor people gvt.
Gee, thanks for nada.
And if you think we should show excitement for your "victory"...remember the "excitement " you showed for ours.
Couldn't wait to start harping on him from day one... day in and day out.
No--your win only means more misery for Americans at the lower end.
More profit for those at the top.
An unbalanced weight....and it's on our shoulders.
And furthermore....*SIGH*! Been there--Done that!
See how easy it is to ignore propagandists? I do not care if they get paid or not, it is just so easy, just ignore.
Is it right that 400 people control 50% of the nations wealth? It's legal, but is it right. Also, is it in the nation's best interest. I am not suggesting that their is a salary cap on CEO pay like there is in football, but I do wonder.
You see, those that control the money get to make the rules (The Supreme Court just assured us of that with Texas No Limit Campaign contributions). And, eventually the teachers, the firemen, the public servants who have to beg and plead for a decent wage while the aristocracy have money to burn becomes disheartened. Just ask Marie Antoinette.
I think most people want what is fair. Most people do not want any lazy person who is unwilling to work or any multi-billion dollar company receive money from the government at tax time.
Most people want a system that rewards those who take risks, but most of the CEO's of today's companies were not risk takers, they were lucky. They hit the lottery when they were appointed by their friends the board of irectors. So, why should their income be 200 times that of an average Joe. Are they 200 times more valuable to their company? Would someone do just as well with a multiple of say 10 times an average worker. Remember that each time a CEO gets rich, Joe Blow has to pay for that each time he buys the product.
If the Tea-Bones are not for the wealthy (which seems to be BS) then they should make sure everyone knows they stand with the working class. I have no problem with smaller government, but don't be hypocritical and say we will balance the budget by giving the wealthiest Americans a pass on their taxes. The more we take from everyone to balance the budget today, the less we need to do this tomorrow. Rip off the band-aid.
by SportsBetter5 years ago
Are Democrats and Republicans the same party?If you look at the facts, you can see many similarities between Republicans and Democrats. One is they both get funding from Goldman Sachs. Why would the same people fund...
by Doug Hughes7 years ago
"..._Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can't afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can't afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more...
by Ralph Deeds4 years ago
Is the Tea Party Destroying the Republican Party?Former U.S. Sen. Bob Bennett believes the tea party is destroying the Republican Party. The ex-Utah lawmaker, a victim of tea party politics when he lost his seat in 2010...
by Ralph Deeds7 years ago
This week in Michigan enough Tea Party delegates showed up at a Republican meeting to elect delegates to the party's nominating convention for the election in November to defeat the current Republican party chairman's...
by Xenonlit5 years ago
The Republicans will not get away with this "Better off than four years ago" business. They already said that they will do anything to bring down the government and the first Black president. Apparently, they...
by T_Augustus7 years ago
If Barack Obama was the Republican candidate, would you have voted for him?Very curious what an HONEST answer would be from both Republicans and Democrats alike...the operative word is "honest".
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.