Anti-Tax Tea Parties Held Across U.S. - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-16-2009, 02:56 PM   #91
Blue Crack Supplier
 
elevated_u2_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I'm here 'cus I don't want to go home
Posts: 31,690
Local Time: 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
teabagging?

<>
__________________

__________________
elevated_u2_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 03:01 PM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2isthebest View Post
Oh, I agree with you there. I'm well aware of how fickle the American people can be especially if things don't go their way. .
I realize you enthusiastically voted for Obama.


But elections are won with the moderate, independent swing voters.

And a good portion of them have been voting against Bush/ Cheney.

If there is a perception that that things are going poorly in the next election cycles, and the GOP puts up something that pretends to be "fresh" they can win.


You will recall Obama threw a lot of dirt on Clinton and presented himself as being the "fresh" new choice.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 03:23 PM   #93
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I realize you enthusiastically voted for Obama.


But elections are won with the moderate, independent swing voters.

And a good portion of them have been voting against Bush/ Cheney.

If there is a perception that that things are going poorly in the next election cycles, and the GOP puts up something that pretends to be "fresh" they can win.

You will recall Obama threw a lot of dirt on Clinton and presented himself as being the "fresh" new choice.

In essence, that was the point I was trying to make, the bolded part, that is. Like both you and I said, the majority of Americans are moderates on most issues. Most Americans want a president and Congressional leadership that will do the most good for the middle-class to lower-income Americans in every way. I think the current financial crisis, the frustration over Iraq, the healthcare situation, etc. have been amplified by the massive failures of the Bush administration in nearly every area. I agree that many people were simply voting against Bush/Cheney. However, McCain spent most of his time on the campaign trail distancing himself from Bush. He was the maverick, the renegade, the guy who was going to turn the Republican party and then the country around. That's how he fancied himself, anyway. In better times, the American public might have bought it. The John McCain of yesteryear was more similar to that image than John McCain the GOP nominee. Why, then, didn't people respond to that this time around? The entire Republican party tried to distance itself from Bush. He spoke via satellite to his own party's convention for less than 10 minutes. Nearly every major speaker there tried to go on a populist rant about all that had gone wrong in the past 8 years apparently "forgetting" the fact that they supported most of it. It was a good show and in times past it may have been enough to pull off a win for the safe, "experienced" choice. It became clear on election night, though, that the Americans saw through the Republican charade beyond the Bush/Cheney debacle. They saw the Republican party was out of ideas, and out of touch with the world in which we now live. And coming back full circle to what you said, unless the Republican party itself realizes this and takes itself back from the super-rich, selfish blowhards and the morality police, fundies, the American people are no longer going to buy what they're selling.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 03:31 PM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 05:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
But it's not just social spending. You love military spending, but don't want to pay the taxes for it...

This is the Elephant size contradiction that keeps hitting conservatives in the ass which you just ignore.
I don't think I have. Paying for the military is GOOD. Military for me is just as important as roads. There is no freedom without political freedom. You would think September 11th would teach people that. Even if they don't like the Iraq mission, certainly Afghanistan was worthy and you would need a military for that. Yes taxes should have been raised to pay for it but it becomes much harder when Bush wanted to increase domestic spending along with it and lower taxes. Not all tax cuts pay for themselves. Everyone knows that Europe has all those social programs because the U.S. spends more on the military so that they can be free to do so. If they want to cut social programs on their side and do more military spending so the U.S. can spend less on military that would be fine by me. Of course that won't happen.

Plus much of the social spending that Bush did didn't result in improvements so having Democrats do what he did doesn't make it somehow more efficient spending. We are talking about government here. If government was more cost efficient we should have government everywhere. It's getting so cynical that it looks like political opposition just criticizes because they want power more than implementing meaningful changes.

Most of the western world wanted to have their cake and eat it too during the post-Soviet era, that was called the "peace dividend", and the threat to freedom didn't actually go away and now decadent westerners want to shower themselves with benefits and pretend that there are no challenges with Iran/Russia/China etc. The debt is getting so big that I may be an old man before I see any meaningful changes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
They want roads just like everyone else. They also want their big ass American SUVs, insurance to cover them, and banks to be able to loan them money and I guarantee you that if Obama let them fail they'd be bitching then.
Here I agree. The public is full of the contradictions as I mentioned in my prior post. To balance the budget will need political courage that can handle political attacks from all sides. The public wants stuff but doesn't want to pay for it. I'm not a huge fan of "tea parties" precisely because of that. Many conservatives like it because they desperately want to see some public awareness on the issue but it will take a lot more effort and convincing of even Democrat supporters to see any real political results like seen during the Contract with America period.
__________________
purpleoscar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 03:36 PM   #95
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
But it's not just social spending. You love military spending, but don't want to pay the taxes for it...

This is the Elephant size contradiction that keeps hitting conservatives in the ass which you just ignore. They want big-ass walls that cost 4 MILLION dollas a mile to keep the brownies out. They want roads just like everyone else. They also want their big ass American SUVs, insurance to cover them, and banks to be able to loan them money and I guarantee you that if Obama let them fail they'd be bitching then.

Like I said before, very few actually want to ride out the market healing itself, but it's easy to be a Tuesday morning armchair quarterback.
EXACTLY!

Most Americans, when asked about things like roads, education, renewable energy, health care research, deposit insurance, banking regulation,military, border control, elimination of drug cartels, the list goes on, want the government to step in and act.

However, we act as if all of this is free. I know the Republicans have popularized the "we can have it all, big spending AND no taxes" argument the last 8 years, but it has utterly failed.

Of course, we should not raise taxes more than necessary, nor should we raise them to the level of Sweden or Denmark or Canada. We need some modest tax increases (top 2 brackets returned to 1990s level, loopholes closed, and deductions limited for some and yes, cap and trade like McCain has supported) to bring in revenue. There is waste, farm subsidies, military programs that we dont need anymore, fraud, govt contracts, etc, but that does not mean the government does not need revenue.

Tea party people, dont even get me started on these knuckledraggers! Have they been asleep for 8 years? Protesting government spending and debt??? If I recall correctly, Bush left us with a $1.3 trillion deficit ,10 trillion in debt and a recession that is going to wind up being worse than 1982 when all is said and done. To think that Obama wanted to come in and spend 800 billion on a a stimulus and 700 billion and counting bailing out banks is ludacris; HE HAD TO. If the stimulus had not passed, if we were not creating a "bad bank" and subjecting banks to stress tests, the economy and our confidence in it would have TANKED COMPLETELY, we would have lost more revenue and the deficit would have been worse than its going to be. Obama has already said he is dead serious about the deficit and is the first President ever to identify the cause- entitlements(medicare,medicaid) and the cause of the cause, health care costs are out of control. Bush has wrongly focused on Social Security, which is by and large fine. Other hard decisions on taxes, farm subsidies, military procurement, payments to medical providers have been made in the FY 2010 budget to move toward deficit reduction. Obama does not lack for caring on the deficit as the protesters suggest. Even the deficit watchdog group the Concord Coalition(founded by a Democrat, Paul Tsongas and a Republican, Warren Rudman) has said that, given the state of the economy, the deficit was not the #1 concern immediately.

Before I get nailed to the wall here, let me just point out that I am not a blind Obama lover. He has had to earn my respect, voting for him was never even a foregone conclusion for me until around summer 2008. What gave me confidence in him is how he has been calm and delibrative through all of the economic collapse, offered substantive responses, taken on the biggest challenges to our future economic growth and most importantly, hired brilliant economic advisers who know what they are doing. These people are not socialists- these are centrists. Larry Summers, Tim Geithner are both market devotees through and through, Peter Orszag is a deficit hawk, Paul Volcker was the Chair of the Federal Reserve, firecely anti-inflation, and Austan Goolsbee is from the University of Chicago Economics department, hardly a bastion of socialism. These are not people that dont care about leaving us in debt, nor are they people who would just spend $800 billion on a stimulus unless we ABSOLUTELY HAD TO. Are we recovered yet? Of course not. But confidence is slowly returning, the market has shown signs of life, the stimulus money is hitting the economy, putting people to work, cutting their tax bills, etc. Growth will be back next quarter, unemployment will continue to rise, but it always peaks after recessions. We are coming out of this, and stronger than we would have had McCain been calling the shots, rest assured!

They are protesting earmarks? Do they even realize that new disclosure rules put in place by Democrats in Congress in 2007 have cut them nearly in half from their heyday under Hastert and DeLay, who used them to trade on votes from fellow Republicans? Obama never flip flopped on this, never said he would eliminate earmarks, only that they would have to pass a legitimacy test. Anyone who thinks the end of earmarks will solve any part of the deficit/debt problem needs a doctor.

Furthermore, what are they protesting?? Just like the original Boston Tea Party Organizers, who were acutally protesting a TAX CUT given to the British East India company, they are against their $400 or $800 tax cut they are getting from Obama?
__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 03:37 PM   #96
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I don't think I have. Paying for the military is GOOD. Military for me is just as important as roads. There is no freedom without political freedom. You would think September 11th would teach people that.


how would increased military spending have prevented September 11?

be specific.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 04:08 PM   #97
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,640
Local Time: 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I don't think I have.
I meant a collective "you", but really I meant conservatives in America. Most like the "cut taxes not defense" mentality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Many conservatives like it because they desperately want to see some public awareness on the issue but it will take a lot more effort and convincing of even Democrat supporters to see any real political results like seen during the Contract with America period.
But this is why is was such a major epic fail, it wasn't about public awareness on the issue of balanced budgets, it was a bitch session for illegal immigration, abortion, liberals = socialists, etc etc...

If it was about the issue of balanced budgets and they actually had a plan, then I probably would have been there yesterday.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 05:22 PM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiger Edge View Post
Well I definitely know that there are sensible people protesting out there who know what they are talking about, but some of this ignorance can't be ignored. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone call Obama a fascist after claiming that he wants to drive this country into socialism.


Some of us reject this.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 05:28 PM   #99
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post


Some of us reject this.


what do you advocate?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 05:35 PM   #100
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
If someone could provide me with, or at least a link to, a well informed reason for yesterday I would appreciate it.

GWB's approval ratings his last term.

There aren't enough anti-war protesters, Bush-haters or even partisan Democrats around to get him down to 20%. His ratings were historically low because people who once put their trust in him came to see him and the Republican congress as Democrats Lite in regards to federal spending, illegal immigration and finally the bank bailouts.

We thought the country was "moving in the wrong direction" too. The direction, unfortunately, Obama is now fasttraking.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 05:45 PM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
what do you advocate?

Energy independence, fiscal responsibility, true political leadership and letting the marketplace weed out inefficient companies.

And banning autotune. I'm tired of hacks in politics and music.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 05:51 PM   #102
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
people who once put their trust in him came to see him and the Republican congress as Democrats Lite in regards to federal spending, illegal immigration and finally the bank bailouts.


if all these people are taking these positions, and all these people are Republicans, doesn't that make them Republican positions?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 05:53 PM   #103
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Energy independence, fiscal responsibility, true political leadership and letting the marketplace weed out inefficient companies.


could you be more specific? would you have bailed out AIG? what programs would you cut? how would you raise revenue? am i right to assume that raising taxes are verboten? where does energy independence come from? does it inclue, say, high speed rail?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 06:04 PM   #104
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
if all these people are taking these positions, and all these people are Republicans, doesn't that make them Republican positions?
Republican yes, conservative, no. As they say, power corrupts.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 07:14 PM   #105
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 01:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar
Whether they like it or not taxes will have to be raised to balance the budget. The spending has been through the roof for a long time. Obama is just continuing what Bush already was for.

All the Neo-Keynesians want to do now is get inflation up because inflation to them is a "recovery". Staff at the Fed also mentioned that they don't want to raise interest rates too soon to create probably another recession so they are obviously going to make the public eat more inflation than they are used to in the coming years. It's looking more and more like the '70s. I think I need some platform shoes and bell-bottoms.
Agreed, a perceptive and succint analysis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I don't think I have. Paying for the military is GOOD. Military for me is just as important as roads. There is no freedom without political freedom. You would think September 11th would teach people that. Even if they don't like the Iraq mission, certainly Afghanistan was worthy and you would need a military for that. Yes taxes should have been raised to pay for it but it becomes much harder when Bush wanted to increase domestic spending along with it and lower taxes. Not all tax cuts pay for themselves. Everyone knows that Europe has all those social programs because the U.S. spends more on the military so that they can be free to do so. If they want to cut social programs on their side and do more military spending so the U.S. can spend less on military that would be fine by me. Of course that won't happen.

Plus much of the social spending that Bush did didn't result in improvements so having Democrats do what he did doesn't make it somehow more efficient spending. We are talking about government here. If government was more cost efficient we should have government everywhere. It's getting so cynical that it looks like political opposition just criticizes because they want power more than implementing meaningful changes.

Most of the western world wanted to have their cake and eat it too during the post-Soviet era, that was called the "peace dividend", and the threat to freedom didn't actually go away and now decadent westerners want to shower themselves with benefits and pretend that there are no challenges with Iran/Russia/China etc. The debt is getting so big that I may be an old man before I see any meaningful changes.
The manner in which Russia and China conduct their business is none of our business, to be honest. Provided they comply with the international trade agreements and don't start pre-emptive wars. Like, you know, your neo-cons did.
I'd allow Iran is problematic.

Explain to me why there have no significant Islamist terrorist incidents in France and Germany.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com